COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA NO. 82289 IN THE MATTER OF: : : A.C., A Minor : : JOURNAL ENTRY Appellant : : AND : : OPINION Date of Announcement of Decision: OCTOBER 16, 2003 Character of Proceeding: Criminal appeal from Court of Common Pleas Juvenile Court Division Case No. 02106210 Judgment: Reversed and remanded. Date of Journalization: Appearances: For Appellant: SUSAN J. MORAN, ESQ. 55 Public Square Building Suite 1010 Cleveland, Ohio 44113 For Appellee: WILLIAM D. MASON Cuyahoga County Prosecutor MEL PLANAS, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113 -2- JAMES J. SWEENEY, J.: Appellant A.C.1 ("defendant") appeals from a decision of the Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court Juvenile Division finding him to be a delinquent child and committing him to the Ohio Department of Youth Services ("ODYS"). For the following reasons, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand for further proceedings. On November 6, 2002, defendant appeared before the Juvenile Court and entered an admission to a complaint of burglary. The admission was the result of a plea agreement on behalf of defendant as complaints were originally filed for burglary and receiving stolen property. On December 10, 2002, defendant was committed to the ODYS for a minimum term of one year. Defendant now appeals his adjudication as a delinquent child and commitment to ODYS and raises two assignments of error for our review. The first assignment of error states: "I. The trial court erred by accepting appellants admission ' of the complaint without providing the assistance of counsel." Juv.R. 29(B) affords a juvenile a right to legal counsel at all stages of the proceedings in juvenile court. See, also, R.C. 2151.352. Although a juvenile may waive this right, the court must make a sufficient inquiry to determine whether the defendant is 1 The parties are referred to herein by their initials or title in accordance with this Court's established policy. -3- doing so knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily. In re Johnson (1995), 106 Ohio App.3d 38. Specifically, the court must give close scrutiny to factors such as the juvenile 's age, emotional stability, mental capacity, and prior criminal experience. Id. Here, the record indicates that the defendant was a thirteen- year-old child who suffered from a learning disability, had a prior criminal trespass charge, and currently lived with his alcoholic grandmother.2 The record shows that defendant admitted to the charge of burglary at the adjudicatory hearing without counsel. The record reflects the following colloquy with regard to defendant's right to counsel: "THE COURT: First of all, you have the right to be represented by an attorney. If you want one and cannot afford one, one would be appointed for you. I'll get back to that. "*** "THE COURT: Do you have any questions you want to ask me? "A.C.: No. "THE COURT: Let me ask you a couple. Are you going to want to be represented by a lawyer or do you want to go forward today without a lawyer? "A.C.: I'll go by myself. "THE COURT: All right ***. 2See the sentencing recommendation provided by the probation department. -4- This Court has previously held that this basic colloquy is insufficient to establish a knowing waiver of the right to counsel because it fails to ascertain whether the juvenile understood the nature of the right to counsel that he would be waiving. See In re Smith (2001), 142 Ohio App.3d 16, 22-23; In re Vaughters, Cuyahoga App. No. 80650, 2002-Ohio-5843; In re K.J., Cuyahoga App. Nos. 79612 & 79940, 2002-Ohio-2615. See, also, In re Johnson (1995), 106 Ohio App.3d 38. Accordingly, we find that the courts colloquy ' did not establish that the defendant fully understood the nature of the rights he was waiving and thus he could not have knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his right to counsel. Defendant's first assignment of error is sustained. Our resolution of this assignment of error renders the remaining assignment moot. Judgment reversed and remanded. -5- It is ordered that appellant recover of appellee his costs herein taxed. The Court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal. It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this Court directing the Court of Common Pleas Juvenile Court Division to carry this judgment into execution. A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure. ANNE L. KILBANE, P.J., and COLLEEN CONWAY COONEY, J., CONCUR. JAMES J. SWEENEY JUDGE N.B. This entry is an announcement of the court's decision. See App.R. 22(B), 22(D) and 26(A); Loc.App.R. 22. This decision will be journalized and will become the judgment and order of the court pursuant to App.R. 22(E) unless a motion for reconsideration with supporting brief, per App.R. 26(A), is filed within ten (10) days of the announcement of the court's decision. The time period for review by the Supreme Court of Ohio shall begin to run upon the journalization of this court's announcement of decision by the clerk per App.R. 22(E). See, also, S.Ct.Prac.R. 112, Section 2(A)(1). .