State v. Chambers
2011 Ohio 1055
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- In 2007 appellee Chambers was charged in Jackson County with breaking and entering and assault; arrested March 16, 2007 and jailed until August 29, 2007.
- May 10, 2007 grand jury indicted Chambers for assault and breaking and entering; a July 30, 2008 status conference was scheduled but Chambers did not appear.
- In 2010, Chambers pro se moved to dismiss for speedy-trial violation; on Feb. 17, 2010 he pleaded guilty to breaking and entering and the assault charge was dismissed; April 29, 2010 the guilty plea was withdrawn.
- June 11, 2010, Chambers moved again to dismiss; the court found 166 days in jail counting triple to 498 speedy-trial days between March 17 and August 29, 2007, and dismissed the charges for failing to be tried within 270 days.
- State appeals, arguing Chambers forfeited speedy-trial rights by failing to appear at a 2008 status conference; the trial court’s ruling is under review for compliance with speedy-trial statutes.
- Ohio’s speedy-trial framework (R.C. 2945.71–2945.73) requires trial within 270 days; days in jail count triple; the burden shifts to the state when prima facie violation is shown.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the trial court err in finding a speedy-trial violation? | Chambers did not timely go to trial, but the time expired after his absence and Bauer bars later assertion. | Chambers' absence at a status conference did not extinguish pre-expiration speedy-trial rights; the clock expired before his nonappearance. | Yes, the court correctly found a speedy-trial violation. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Pachay, 64 Ohio St.2d 218 (1980) (speedy-trial statute implements constitutional right)
- Brecksville v. Cook, 75 Ohio St.3d 53 (1996) (strict enforcement of speedy-trial rights with flexible extensions)
- State v. Lautenslager, 112 Ohio App.3d 108 (1996) (three-day counting for days in jail)
- State v. McCornell, 91 Ohio App.3d 141 (1993) (three-day rule for days in jail applied to speedy-trial computation)
- State v. Steiner, 71 Ohio App.3d 249 (1991) (supporting computation of speedy-trial days)
- State v. Butcher, 27 Ohio St.3d 28 (1986) (prima facie showing shifts burden to state)
- State v. Baker, 92 Ohio App.3d 516 (1993) (burden-shifting framework in speedy-trial review)
- State v. Howard, 79 Ohio App.3d 705 (1992) (extensions to speedy-trial time when applicable)
- State v. Bauer, 61 Ohio St.2d 83 (1980) (waiver of speedy-trial rights where defendant’s actions cause delay)