State v. Marbury
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
Fain, Judge.
{¶ 1} Defendant-appellant, Juarron Marbury, appeals from his conviction and sentence for sexual imposition. He argues that his statutory right to a speedy trial was violated. We conclude that Marbury was not denied his right to a speedy trial. Therefore, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
I
{¶ 2} In September 2008, 20-year-old Marbury had sexual intercourse with a 14-year-old girl, S.B. As a result, Marbury was served with a summons and complaint charging him with one count of sexual imposition on October 10, 2008. On October 29, Marbury filed a motion to continue his…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited3 opinions
- State v. MincyOhio Supreme Court · 1982
- State v. BrownOhio Supreme Court · 2002
- State v. BrownOhio Supreme Court · 2002
3Cited by7 opinions
- State v. KnottOhio Court of Appeals · 2024
- State v. RameyOhio Court of Appeals · 2012
- State v. VanscoyOhio Court of Appeals · 2014
- State v. AllenOhio Court of Appeals · 2017
- State v. AllenOhio Court of Appeals · 2017
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.