APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE WAYNE COUNTY MUNICIPAL COURT COUNTY OF WAYNE, OHIO CASE No. TRD 12-07-06204
JOHN E. JOHNSON, JR., Attorney at Law, for Appellant.
DANIEL R. LUTZ, Prosecuting Attorney, and NATHAN R. SHAKER, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for Appellee.
DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY
(¶1} Appellant, Virginia Manacapilli, appeals the judgment of the Wayne County Municipal Court. This Court reverses and remands.
(¶2} On June 9, 2012, Manacapilli was pulled over in the Village of Mount Eaton and cited for speeding, a minor misdemeanor. On June 25, 2012, Manacapilli appeared in Mount Eaton Mayor's Court and entered a plea of not guilty. On July 2, 2012, the mayor's court certified the case and ordered that it be transferred to Wayne County Municipal Court. Arraignment in municipal court was set for July 11, 2012. While Manacapilli appeared in court on July 11, 2012, the arraignment was continued until July 18, 2012, at which time Manacapilli pleaded not guilty. Subsequently, on August 16, 2012, Manacapilli filed a motion to dismiss the charge on the basis that the speedy trial time had expired. The trial court denied the motion that same day.
(¶3} The matter proceeded to trial and Manacapilli was found guilty of speeding. She received a $150 fine and her license was suspended for six months.
(¶4} Manacapilli filed a timely notice of appeal. Now before this Court, Manacapilli raises one assignment of error.
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR
THE TRIAL COURT ERRED BY FAILING TO DISMISS THE CHARGE PURSUANT TO R.C. 2945.73.
(¶5} In her sole assignment of error, Manacapilli contends that the trial court erred in denying her motion to dismiss. We agree.
(¶6} In support of her assignment of error, Manacapilli argues that the trial court's failure to dismiss the charge against her contravened the Supreme Court of Ohio's interpretation of the speedy trial statutes articulated in Brecksville v. Cook, 75 Ohio St.3d 53 (1996). Manacapilli contends that, because she was not brought to trial in a timely manner as mandated by R.C. 2945.71, the charge against her should have been dismissed pursuant ...