State v. Hahaj

Citations

• 2025 Ohio 52

Syllabus

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW/CRIMINAL – PREINDICTMENT DELAY – DUE PROCESS – DUE COURSE OF LAW – ABUSE OF DISCRETION – DE NOVO – STANDARD OF REVIEW – ACTUAL PREJUDICE – MOTION TO DISMISS: The appellate court does not review the trial court's dismissal of an indictment based on preindictment delay for an abuse of discretion, but should instead defer to the trial court's factual determinations and inferences where supported by competent, credible evidence, while reviewing de novo its legal conclusions and application of the relevant legal standard to the facts. Defendant did not meet her burden of showing actual prejudice from the State's preindictment delay, where defendant failed to demonstrate how particular lost evidence and unavailable witnesses could have minimized the impact of the State's evidence or otherwise bolstered her defense.