State v. Mourey
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtSweeney, J.
The issue certified by the court of appeals to this court is as follows: “When does the one-hundred-eighty-day period set forth in R.C. 2963.30, within which a criminal defendant incarcerated in another jurisdiction must be brought to trial, begin to run?”
For the reasons that follow, we hold that the one-hundred-eighty-day time period set forth in R.C. 2963.30, Ohio’s codification of the Interstate Agreement on Detainers, begins to run when a prisoner substantially complies with the requirements of the statute set forth in Article 111(a) and (b) thereof. Since we find that defendant…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Pittman v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware · 1973
- McBride v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1978
- State v. FergusonOhio Court of Appeals · 1987
- Commonwealth v. MartensMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1986
- State v. SeadinMontana Supreme Court · 1979
3Cited by21 opinions
- David Andrew Birdwell v. Jack Skeen, Jr., Criminal District Attorney of Smith County, TexasCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1993
- State v. WellsOhio Court of Appeals · 1994
- Johnson v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado · 1997
- State v. QuinonesOhio Court of Appeals · 2006
- State v. WilliamsOhio Supreme Court · 2023
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.