State v. Broughton
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtHolmes, J.
The primary issue before the court is whether the time in which to bring Broughton to trial on his second indictment had expired, pursuant to Ohio’s speedy-trial statute. For the reasons that follow, we answer such query in the negative.
*256I
Speedy-Trial Computation
The key fact we must discern from the record in this case is how much time had run against the state pursuant to R.C. 2945.71 et seq., in order to determine whether Broughton’s speedy-trial rights were violated.
The right to a speedy trial is encompassed within the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which provides that…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Barker v. WingoSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Benton v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- United States v. MarionSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- State v. LongOhio Supreme Court · 1978
- United States v. LovascoSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by96 opinions
- City of Brecksville v. CookOhio Supreme Court · 1996
- State v. MyersOhio Supreme Court · 2002
- State v. SanchezOhio Supreme Court · 2006
- Brecksville v. CookOhio Supreme Court · 1996
- State v. MyersOhio Supreme Court · 2002
91 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.