State v. Watkins

Citations

• 2021 Ohio 163

Syllabus

Appellant was not provided with ineffective assistance when his counsel failed to obtain his consent prior to waiving his speedy trial rights for it is well-established that a defendant is bound by his counsel's waiver of speedy trial rights even though the waiver might have been executed without his consent. Appellant was also not provided with ineffective assistance when his counsel failed to file a motion to suppress raising a chain of custody issue for it is equally well-established that a challenge to the chain of custody is an issue not properly raised in a motion to suppress, but in a motion in limine. Additionally, the trial court did not err by denying appellant's motion to dismiss on speedy trial grounds because the 270-day time limit set forth in R.C. 2945.71(C)(2) had not yet expired before appellant entered his no contest plea when considering there were several tolling events that bring the total number of days chargeable to the state back down below the required 270-day time limit. These tolling events included, but were not limited to, appellant filing a motion for a continuance and a motion to suppress. Finally, the trial court's decision to sentence appellant to an indefinite term of a minimum of five years in prison and a maximum of seven-and-one-half years in prison was not clearly and convincingly contrary to law where the trial court properly considered the necessary sentencing statutes, R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12, correctly imposed postrelease control, and accurately sentenced appellant within the permissible statutory range for the first-degree felony offense.