Skip to main content

State v. Sweeney

Citations

  • 252 N.E.3d 253
  • 2024 Ohio 3425

Syllabus

Appellant's statutory and constitutional rights to a speedy-trial were not violated. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by ordering a trial continuance as opposed to dismissing appellant's case as a consequence of the State's discovery violations. Appellant's conviction for aggravated possession of drugs was supported by sufficient evidence. Judgment affirmed.

Judges: Welbaum

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

60 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.