2019 Ohio 1491
Ohio Ct. App.2019Background
- Donald L. Jenny, Jr. was charged after a single-vehicle crash with OVI and failure to control; arraignment was continued so he could obtain counsel.
- Defense counsel filed a notice of appearance, waived reading of charges, and entered a not-guilty plea; the case was set for trial.
- More than 35 days after the plea, Jenny filed a motion to suppress; the State objected as untimely and the trial court denied leave to file as untimely for lack of good cause.
- Jenny moved for reconsideration and submitted counsel was overburdened (public defender under‑staffing); the trial court again denied relief.
- Jenny pleaded no contest to both charges, reserved appeal, and appealed the denial of the suppression motion.
- The Ninth District affirmed: (1) denial of leave to file the late suppression motion was not an abuse of discretion; (2) ineffective-assistance claim failed for lack of prejudice and because the record lacked evidence a suppression motion would have succeeded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Jenny) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying an untimely motion to suppress | The motion was filed after the 35-day deadline; defense offered no good cause before the deadline, so denial was proper | Motion was timely because no formal arraignment occurred; alternatively, the court should have granted leave in the interest of justice (discovery delay, counsel caseload) | Affirmed — denial not an abuse of discretion; Jenny failed to show good cause and did not seek extension before deadline |
| Whether counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to timely file the suppression motion | Counsel’s performance did not prejudice the defense; defendant cannot show the suppression motion would have been granted | Counsel’s late filing deprived Jenny of a likely‑meritorious suppression motion, causing prejudice | Affirmed — ineffective‑assistance claim fails because prejudice not shown; record lacks evidence that a suppression motion would have succeeded |
Key Cases Cited
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (Ohio 1983) (abuse of discretion standard explained)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two‑prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- State v. Bradley, 42 Ohio St.3d 136 (Ohio 1989) (deficient performance and prejudice standards articulated)