2018 Ohio 1980
Ohio Ct. App.2018Background
- Ronald J. Bruce was indicted in Portage County on three felony counts of nonsupport on October 26, 2010; a warrant issued the same day.
- He was arrested on that warrant in Franklin County on May 23, 2011; Franklin County ordered him to surrender to Portage County within five days, but he did not comply and gave no excuse.
- Bruce remained at large (but not incarcerated on these charges) until re-arrest on the same warrant in Franklin County on January 13, 2017; he then reported to Portage County and was arraigned January 27, 2017.
- Bruce moved to dismiss, asserting violations of his statutory speedy-trial rights (R.C. 2945.71), his Sixth Amendment speedy-trial rights, and the six-year statute of limitations (R.C. 2901.13).
- The trial court denied the motion; Bruce pled no contest to two counts (the third was dismissed) and received community control. He appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Bruce) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether R.C. 2945.71 statutory speedy-trial time was violated (270 days) | Time after May 23, 2011 is tolled/attributable to Bruce because he disobeyed the Franklin County order to surrender; delay was caused by defendant | State failed to pursue/locate him; delay between 2011 and 2017 should be charged to the state | Denied. Delay from May 2011–Jan 2017 was attributable to Bruce’s neglect under R.C. 2945.72(D), so statutory period was extended. |
| Whether Bruce’s Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial was violated (Barker factors) | Delay was largely caused or contributed to by Bruce; he did not assert the right promptly; no demonstrable prejudice | State’s failure to locate him for six years weighs against the state and caused constitutional violation | Denied. Barker factors weigh against Bruce: limited state delay, defendant caused/contributed to most delay, belated assertion, and no actual prejudice shown. |
| Whether prosecution was barred by the six-year statute of limitations | Prosecution commenced when warrant was executed (Bruce was arrested within limitations); alternatively limitations tolled while Bruce purposely avoided prosecution | Bruce claims he was not served with the indictment until 2017 and limitations therefore expired | Denied. Arrest on the warrant executed the prosecution within the limitations period; even if not, limitations tolled while defendant purposely avoided prosecution. |
Key Cases Cited
- Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (U.S. 1972) (announcing four-factor test for Sixth Amendment speedy-trial claims)
- State v. Triplett, 78 Ohio St.3d 566 (Ohio 1997) (delay not necessarily fatal where defendant’s own conduct contributed to delay)
- Doggett v. United States, 505 U.S. 647 (U.S. 1992) (delay of nearly one year often deemed presumptively prejudicial)
- State v. Bess, 126 Ohio St.3d 350 (Ohio 2010) (statute of limitations tolled when accused purposely avoids prosecution)