State v. Brooks, 114 N.E.3d 220

Defendant Perry Brooks was arrested May 17, 2016 for possession/trafficking of crack cocaine and jailed; indictment returned July 12, 2016; arraigned July 20, 2016.
Trial initially set for August 4, 2016; Brooks moved for continuance and discovery; court continued to September 29, 2016 and noted Brooks waived time during the continuance.
On September 29, 2016 Brooks requested new counsel; new counsel appointed October 4 and filed motions; the court allowed inspection of discovery/DVD and gave Brooks 14 days to accept or reject a plea offer (order dated November 9, 2016).
Assignment commissioner rescheduled trial by notice from September 29, 2016 to February 16–17, 2017 (notice filed December 6, 2016) without a journal entry stating reasons for tolling.
State sought continuance in January 2017 pending Ohio Sup. Ct. reconsideration of Gonzales I; Supreme Court vacated Gonzales I on March 6, 2017; trial occurred May 11–12, 2017.
Brooks moved to dismiss on speedy-trial grounds at the start of trial; trial court made no ruling and proceeded; jury convicted; appellate court reversed and ordered discharge for statutory speedy-trial violation.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Brooks)	Held
Whether Brooks was denied his statutory speedy-trial right under R.C. 2945.71/.72	Time after September–November 2016 was tolled: (1) delay from Brooks’s request for new counsel, (2) counsel’s request to view DVD/review plea, and (3) court docket required rescheduling to Feb. 16 was reasonable	Trial exceeded 90-day jailed defendant limit; after November 9, 2016 all defense motions were resolved and speedy-trial clock should have run; no written response to plea so court could have proceeded Nov. 25, 2016	Reversed: Brooks established prima facie violation; state failed to prove tolling from Nov. 25, 2016 through Feb. 16, 2017; convictions vacated and defendant discharged.
Whether the court’s December 6, 2016 continuance satisfied Mincy (journal entry of reasons)	Court’s docket pressures and earlier statements demonstrate the rescheduled date was the next available and thus reasonable	No journaled reasons for the December 6 continuance; isolated court comment about scheduling was in context of arranging a DVD viewing and does not affirmatively show necessity or reasonableness	Held Mincy not satisfied for that continuance; record does not affirmatively demonstrate reasonableness in purpose or length, so tolling not established.

State v. Gonzales, 150 Ohio St.3d 261 (Ohio 2016) (initial Ohio Supreme Court decision on cocaine weight in mixtures)
State v. Gonzales, 150 Ohio St.3d 276 (Ohio 2017) (Supreme Court vacating prior decision and clarifying how mixed-substance weight is treated)
Brecksville v. Cook, 75 Ohio St.3d 53 (Ohio 1996) (statutes implementing speedy-trial rights must be strictly construed against the State)
State v. Ramey, 132 Ohio St.3d 309 (Ohio 2012) (each day jailed counts as three days; continuances must be reasonable and may be otherwise demonstrated by the record)
State v. Mincy, 2 Ohio St.3d 6 (Ohio 1982) (trial court must journal reasons for sua sponte continuances prior to speedy-trial deadline)
State v. Brown, 98 Ohio St.3d 121 (Ohio 2002) (demand for discovery or bill of particulars tolls speedy-trial time)
State v. Adams, 144 Ohio St.3d 429 (Ohio 2015) (270-day felony speedy-trial rule; jailed defendant counted at triple rate)