speedy trial 2945.71 does it apply?

[arazi]

What is the name of your state? OH

I have an Ohio OVI case that has been pending six months now. I have an inexperienced ovi attorney that I am thinking about firing. He charges a lot but he did not even know the ALS ramifications of refusing to take the breathalyzer. My license has been suspended all this time with occupational priviliges. The occupational privileges hardly do me any good because I am a salesman that has to travel out of state. I have not been able to rent a car since the date of the offense. Needless to say, I'm getting to know the public transportation systems in America pretty well.

Anyway, my current situation is that it has been nearly 90 days since my motion to suppress hearing and I have not heard from the court regarding a date for a jury trial (a jury demand was filed). Prior to the motion to suppress my attorney filed a time waiver that the judge required because of a continuance request (again, this was prior to the motion to suppress).

My question: does the speedy trial clock start anew after the motion to suppress hearing or does the time waiver give the court all the time they want to sit on the case? I am interpreting the statute as that they have 90 days to bring me to trial (1st offense misdemeanor).

Thanks!What is the name of your state?

[Curt581]

In a nutshell, they've got 90 days to bring you to trial... unless you waive it, which you did.

No, speedy trial "time clocks" do not renew. Once you voluntarily waive it, it's no longer an issue.

Otherwise, all defendants would have to do is file motions and continuances until the 90 days are past, then they could say, "Neener neener neeener, time's up!"

It doesn't work that way.

[arazi]

Then how do you explain State v. Stoff 2001- Ohio-1836?

I would think that there is some provision for stale cases and judicial indolence.

[moburkes]

Originally Posted by arazi

Then how do you explain State v. Stoff 2001- Ohio-1836?

I would think that there is some provision for stale cases and judicial indolence.

How does that case apply to YOURS is the question?

[FlyingRon]

Stoff probably doesn't apply here. In Stoff, the waiver was a standard waiver expressly limitted to the issue of the pretrial hearing. The pretrial hearing was held, so the clock started again because the wavier was no longer valid. I suspect in your case your lawyer filed a general "waive right to speedy trial" for the continuance. You might petition to start the 90 day time again now, but it is still officially in obeyance.

[seniorjudge]

Originally Posted by arazi

...
judicial indolence
....

Isn't that redundant?

[arazi]

Thank You for your replies...and...yes, judicial indolence would be redundant so please excuse that post.

On that topic, however, let's say that they misplaced the file and I serve the entire ALS term. One year elapses and get my license back from the BMV.

After about 13 months or so they find the file and commence prosecution once again. Would further prosecution constitute double jeopardy as in State v. Gustafson?

[moburkes]

Why do you insist upon using words when you don't understand their meanings?

[arazi]

Uh...exactly what words are you referring to???

I'll take you on one-to-one in a volcabulary test anywhere, anyplace, anytime.
I could probably drink you under the table too!

[seniorjudge]

Originally Posted by arazi

Thank You for your replies...and...yes, judicial indolence would be redundant so please excuse that post.

On that topic, however, let's say that they misplaced the file and I serve the entire ALS term. One year elapses and get my license back from the BMV.

After about 13 months or so they find the file and commence prosecution once again. Would further prosecution constitute double jeopardy as in State v. Gustafson?

Your license suspension and the criminal charge are two different things.

But rephrase the question because I don't understand what you are asking either.

[moburkes]

Originally Posted by arazi

Uh...exactly what words are you referring to???

I'll take you on one-to-one in a volcabulary test anywhere, anyplace, anytime.
I could probably drink you under the table too!

I don't pay attention to the number of posts until someone points it out to me. As far as I'm concerned, it means nothing.

I disagree with your "volcabulary" test.

Since, I don't drink, you're correct. However, it appears that your drinking has gotten you into trouble at least once, so I don't think that's a smart thing to bet with.

[seniorjudge]

Originally Posted by arazi

...

I'll take you on one-to-one in a volcabulary test anywhere, anyplace, anytime.

....

I nominate this for the funniest post ever on this board!!!

[moburkes]

Originally Posted by seniorjudge

I nominate this for the funniest post ever on this board!!!

You're not kidding!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[outonbail]

Originally Posted by seniorjudge

I nominate this for the funniest post ever on this board!!!

It's got my vote!

But,,,, this doesn't mean that I'll be subjected to a "volcabulary" test does it?

[LindaP777]

OMG - I'm rolling on the floor laughing!!!

Originally Posted by arazi

I could probably drink you under the table too!

Yes, you probably could! I bet your mama is so proud!
(I can hear her now, "That's my boy! The drunk one, over there, but he's still standing!!! Out drank everyone in the room! And boy, aint his vocabatry wundeful? Justn' like his mama! Someun tak away his car keys, now. Huh-oh . . ."