State v. King
2018 Ohio 3232
Ohio Ct. App.2018Background
- In Jan 2017 a Sheridan High School student reported a sexual assault to guidance counselor Stephanie Winters, who identified the assailant as the son of Christopher King, the school principal. Winters and another counselor, Alicia Stockler, failed to report the allegation to authorities; Stockler suggested Winters speak with King.
- King told Winters to continue counseling the student and said he would "take care of the rest," but he did not report the allegation. School officials later learned of the matter; King admitted to Superintendent Perkins he had not reported it and was fired.
- King was charged in municipal court (served March 30, 2017) with failure to report and duty to report child abuse. The state dismissed the municipal filing and refiled the duty-to-report count in juvenile court (juvenile court served June 22, 2017).
- King filed a written not-guilty plea in juvenile court, filed a motion to suppress based on Garrity, and later moved to dismiss for violation of his speedy-trial rights after the court denied a continuance for his counsel, dismissed the suppression motion for lack of counsel at the hearing, and set trial.
- The juvenile court tried King and convicted him of duty to report; King was sentenced (30 days suspended) and appealed, arguing principally that his speedy-trial rights were violated.
Issues
| Issue | State's Argument | King's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether dismissal and refiling in juvenile court tolled or reset the speedy-trial clock | The refiling in juvenile court meant the new filing governed speedy-trial timing | The municipal filing tolled time and refiling did not reset the clock; time continued to run from original service | The court held the municipal nolle prosequi tolled but did not reset the speedy-trial clock (refiling was treated as a new filing after a nolle prosequi) |
| Which service starts the juvenile-court speedy-trial clock after a nolle prosequi | The state treated the juvenile-court service as the operative start date | King argued he was entitled to credit for time charged under the municipal service, and juvenile service did not restart time earlier than actual service | The court held official service in juvenile court (certified mail June 22) tolled time until that service but credited the earlier municipal time; overall calculation exceeded statutory limit |
| Whether King was brought to trial within R.C. time limits for a fourth-degree misdemeanor | The state implicitly argued its events complied with tolling exceptions and time was within limits | King argued the statutory 45-day limit expired before his motion to dismiss and trial | The court held King accrued 49 chargeable days, violating the 45-day limit and warranted dismissal |
| Whether other errors (denial of continuance, suppression dismissal, probation condition) required relief after speedy-trial reversal | State defended those rulings on the merits | King challenged denial of continuance and sanction dismissing suppression, and probation condition ordering him to observe a sexual-assault trial | Moot due to reversal on speedy-trial grounds; remaining claims not reached |
Key Cases Cited
- MacDonald v. State, 48 Ohio St.2d 66 (Ohio 1976) (speedy-trial right in Ohio Constitution and related rights)
- United States v. MacDonald, 456 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1982) (purpose of speedy-trial rule to minimize disruption from pending charges)
- Brecksville v. Cook, 75 Ohio St.3d 53 (Ohio 1996) ("removal" in R.C. 2945.72(F) can mean transfer between state courts)
- Westlake v. Cougill, 56 Ohio St.2d 230 (Ohio 1978) (time tolled during nolle prosequi and credited upon refiling)
- Spratz v. State, 58 Ohio St.2d 61 (Ohio 1979) (nolle prosequi tolls speedy-trial time until reindictment)
- Bonariggo v. State, 62 Ohio St.2d 7 (Ohio 1980) (crediting time pending under original charge when nolle prosequi entered)
- State v. Brown, 98 Ohio St.3d 121 (Ohio 2002) (demand for discovery is a tolling event under R.C. 2945.72(E))