State v. Johnson
2014 Ohio 4506
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- Johnson was convicted by no-contest plea to felonious assault (deadly weapon) in 2013-CR-1019, a second-degree felony.
- He had prior and concurrent custody in related cases, including 2012-CR-2974 (carrying a concealed weapon) with a $25,000 bond and an OR bond in 2013-CR-1019.
- Johnson remained jailed in lieu of bail in both cases; the bonds and custody status changed on April 3, 2013.
- He moved to dismiss on speedy-trial grounds on October 27, 2013, arguing triple counting under R.C. 2945.71(E)(2).
- The trial court rejected triple-counting, holding he was not jailed solely on the pending charge in 2013-CR-1019.
- Johnson challenged sentencing before a judge other than the assigned judge, arguing lack of opportunity to continue for the assigned judge.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether triple-counting applies to Johnson | Johnson argues triple-counting applies due to separate pending charges. | Johnson contends multiple charges from the same incident justify triple-count. | Triple-counting does not apply; no speedy-trial violation. |
| Whether sentencing by a different judge violated rights | Johnson argues assigned judge should have presided, or given continuance option. | No required sua sponte continuance; sentence within agreed range; counsel could request continuance. | No error; no plain error or prejudice; sentencing proper. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Sanchez, 110 Ohio St.3d 274 (Ohio 2006) (triple-count rule applies only when jailed solely on pending charge)
- State v. Parker, 113 Ohio St.3d 207 (Ohio 2007) (when charges share a common litigation history, incarceration on multiple charges may count as pending for triple-count)
- State v. Parsley, 82 Ohio App.3d 567 (Ohio 10th Dist. 1993) (when charges arise from a single incident, may treat as single pending charge for triple-count)
- State v. Dankworth, 172 Ohio App.3d 159 (Ohio 2d Dist. 2007) (agrees Parker inapplicability where charges are unrelated)
- Pecina, State v. Pecina, 76 Ohio App.3d 775 (Ohio 6th Dist. 1992) (sentencing concerns where assigned judge not presiding; common discussion on continuity of proceedings)