State v. Bauer
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
The sole issue presented in this appeal is whether appellee was entitled to a discharge under R. C. 2945.73. Appellant contends, in essence, that because appellee’s trial was originally scheduled within the statutory period set forth by R. C. 2945.71(C)(2), and because ap*84pellant was ready to proceed with the cause at that time and appellee failed to appear, appellant has satisfied its statutory duty to prosecute appellee who must now rely solely upon his constitutional (as opposed to statutory) right to a speedy trial in order to challenge his conviction.
R. C. 2945.71(C)(2) specifies that a…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- The People v. FosdickIllinois Supreme Court · 1967
- People v. AndersonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
- People v. HayesAppellate Court of Illinois · 1977
3Cited by43 opinions
- State v. PachayOhio Supreme Court · 1980
- State v. KingOhio Supreme Court · 1994
- Fred D. Ewing, Sr. v. Norris W. McMackinCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1986
- State v. KingOhio Supreme Court · 1994
- State v. Martin (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2019
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.