Login | March 28, 2024

Court rules delayed indictment did not violate speedy trial rights

JESSICA SHAMBAUGH
Special to the Legal News

Published: July 24, 2014

The Franklin County Court of Common Pleas properly dismissed a man’s robbery charges due to a speedy trial violation but must still consider two counts of the indictment, according to a recent ruling from the 10th District Court of Appeals.

The state appealed to the three-judge appellate panel and argued that the trial court improperly dismissed the five-count indictment against Benjamin Williams Jr.

The facts of the case stated that the Columbus Police Department filed a complaint in March 2009 alleging Williams robbed a CVS Pharmacy on North High Street.

The municipal court issued an arrest warrant related to the single charge of robbery but Williams was not taken into custody.

Eleven days later, the state alleged Williams robbed a CVS Pharmacy on Parsons Avenue.

Law enforcement officials, however, never filed a complaint in connection to that robbery.

In June 2009, CPD received notice that Williams was in pretrial incarceration in Georgia for an armed robbery.

The department did not communicate that information to the prosecutor’s office and the state made no motion to transport Williams to Ohio or further proceed against him.

Williams pleaded guilty to the charge against him in Georgia in May 2012.

That court sentenced him to 20 years in prison and gave him credit for the time he spent in pretrial incarceration.

The following February, Williams filed a letter with the Franklin County Municipal Court seeking a final disposition of the case regarding the High Street CVS.

That letter prompted the assistant county prosecutor to take action and the state indicted Williams on five felony counts in March 2013.

The indictment included two counts of robbery related to the High Street CVS, two counts of robbery related to the Parsons Avenue CVS and one count of escape because the state claimed Williams removed or disregarded an ankle monitor at the time of the offenses.

Williams pleaded not guilty to each of the counts and filed a motion to dismiss the indictment because the state violated his constitutionally guaranteed right to a speedy trial.

The trial court granted the motion to dismiss and the state appealed to the 10th District.

The appellate panel maintained that it must consider if the delay was “presumptively prejudicial” and if so it must consider the length of the delay, the reason for it, the defendant’s assertion of his speedy trial rights and the resulting prejudice.

“Here, the Columbus Police Department filed the municipal court complaint for the High Street CVS robbery on March 30, 2009 but the felony indictment did not issue until March 15, 2013, nearly four years later. By the time appellee filed his motion to dismiss on Aug. 19, 2013, more than four years had passed since the initial municipal complaint,” Judge Betsy Luper Schuster wrote for the court, finding that such a delay was presumptively prejudicial.

Upon review, the judges determined that the length of the delay was significant and that the government was to blame for that delay because it knew where Williams was located as he awaited trial in Georgia.

“The state offered no explanation for its failure to pursue appellee despite knowing his precise whereabouts since June 2009,” Judge Luper Schuster stated.

The judges noted that Williams properly asserted his speedy trial rights and held that such a substantial delay would inherently prejudice his defense.

“Although there is not a showing of particularized prejudice, we agree with appellee and the trial court that the state’s ‘excessive delay is sufficient reason to compromise the reliability of the trial in ways that neither party can prove or identify in advance’ especially where ‘the passage of time is wholly attributable to the state’s inactivity,” Judge Luper Schuster wrote, affirming the lower court’s decision to dismiss.

Similarly, the appellate judges found that Williams’ escape charge related to the High Street CVS robbery and therefore, the state should have known about it at the time of the first complaint against him.

They ruled that the trial court could have used the same logic to dismiss that count of the indictment and once again affirmed.

However, they determined that the state did not file a complaint against Williams concerning the Parsons Avenue CVS until March 2013.

“Only five months had elapsed from the time of indictment to the time appellee sought dismissal,” Judge Luper Schuster stated.

“In certain situations, speedy-trial protections can apply to a pre-indictment delay in commencing prosecution when the defendant demonstrates actual prejudice.”

The judges found that Williams failed to show any specific, non-speculative prejudice that would be sufficient to justify a dismissal.

Rather, he asserted only a generalized prejudice based almost entirely on the delay in commencing prosecution.

“Thus, because appellee cannot demonstrate actual prejudice from the pre-indictment delay related to Counts 4 and 5, it was error for the court to dismiss those counts of the indictment.”

Judges William Klatt and Julia Dorrian joined Judge Luper Schuster in affirming the dismissal of the first three counts of the indictment and remanding the matter for the common pleas court to address the remaining counts.

The case is cited State v. Williams, 2014-Ohio-2737.

Copyright © 2014 The Daily Reporter - All Rights Reserved


[Back]