State v. Vanscoy, 2014 Ohio 3482

Vanscoy arrested July 5, 2012 after grabbing a 17-year-old on the University of Akron campus; indicted on abduction (felony) and assault (misdemeanor).
After multiple continuances and new counsel, Vanscoy moved to dismiss for speedy-trial violation on May 23, 2013; motion denied May 28, 2013.
Vanscoy pled no contest on May 31, 2013 and was sentenced to 2 years in prison with a no-contact directive to the victim.
Trials and pretrials occurred over a period of months with various continuances and journal entries reflecting tolling and scheduling decisions.
The sentencing entry included a no-contact order with the victim, which Vanscoy argues was not imposed at sentencing and thus cannot stand.
Court affirms in part and vacates in part: speedy-trial ruling affirmed? (assignment I overruled) and no-contact provision vacated.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Speedy-trial violation due to tolling	Vanscoy argues clock violated by tolling and delays.	State contends tolls and waivers preserved timely trial.	Assignment I overruled; delays tolling appropriately.
No-contact order not imposed at sentencing	No-contact provision not announced at sentencing, cannot be imposed.	Authority to order no contact arguable; not properly included in sentencing.	No-contact clause vacated; remainder of sentence affirmed.

State v. Pachay, 64 Ohio St.2d 218 (1980) (speedy-trial right recognized; statutory framework for timing)
State v. Jackson, 2012-Ohio-3524 (Ninth Dist. 2012) (tolling and speedy-trial calculations)
State v. Williams, 2012-Ohio-3417 (Ninth Dist. 2012) (start of speedy-trial clock; jail time counted as tolling days)
State v. Ramey, 2012-Ohio-2904 (Ohio Supreme Court 2012) (strict construction of extensions under R.C. 2945.72; reasonableness of continuances)
State v. McRae, 55 Ohio St.2d 149 (1978) (continuance beyond limits may be reasonable if consented to by defense)