Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eleventh District, Ashtabula
Appeal from the Ashtabula Municipal Court, Case No. 15 CRB
Michael Franklin, Ashtabula City Solicitor, and Lori B.
Lamer, Assistant Ashtabula City Solicitor, Ashtabula
Municipal Court, (For Plaintiff-Appellee).
M. Sexton, (For Defendant-Appellant).
TIMOTHY P. CANNON, J.
Appellant, Jerry DeCola, appeals from the June 21, 2016
judgment entry of sentence of the Ashtabula Municipal Court.
The trial court found appellant guilty of resisting arrest, a
second-degree misdemeanor in violation of R.C. 2921.33(A),
and of aggravated disorderly conduct, a fourth-degree
misdemeanor in violation of R.C. 2917.11(A)(1) & (E)(3).
For the following reasons, the trial court's decision is
A summons and complaint was filed in the Ashtabula Municipal
Court on July 27, 2015, charging appellant with resisting
arrest and aggravated disorderly conduct. Appellant was
summoned to appear in court on August 4, 2015. After
appellant failed to appear, the trial court issued a warrant
for his arrest on August 13, 2015.
Appellant appeared in court on November 30, 2015. It is
unclear from the record whether appellant was arrested on the
warrant issued or if he appeared on his own. Appellant
explained that he failed to appear on August 4, 2015, because
he had been in the hospital and was told "the Court date
might have been cancelled and everything." After the
judge explained appellant's rights and the effects of
different pleas, appellant requested an attorney. A plea of
not guilty was entered on appellant's behalf. The
following exchange took place regarding appellant's
speedy trial rights:
Court: Okay. Well, you have a right to
what's known as a speedy trial. That would be, we would
have to set this within a period of time, where you would
have to be ready to proceed and have all your witnesses, and
the prosecutor would be ready to go to trial.
If you would like to have a pretrial, you would waive your
speedy trial rights and you would request a pretrial, where
your attorney and you can meet with the prosecutor to see if
this matter can be resolved before going to trial. That's
why it's called a pretrial.
So, it is up to you what you want to do.
Appellant: A pretrial.
Thereafter, appellant executed a written time waiver, which
states, "I fully understand that my request may result
in an extension of time beyond that provided for under O.R.C.
2945.71. I further acknowledge and waive my rights pursuant
to O.R.C. 2945.71, 2945.72 and 2945.73, as well as the
Federal and State Constitutional speedy trial
Appellant was appointed counsel and a pretrial was set for
March 1, 2016. The case was set for a change of plea hearing
on April 7, 2016. Plea negotiations broke down, and the
parties requested the matter be set for trial, which was
scheduled for May 24, 2016.
Appellant appeared for trial before the court on May 24,
2016, represented by counsel. Prior to trial, he agreed to
enter a no contest plea to both charges, waiving presentation
of evidence and stipulating to a finding of guilt. Before
taking his plea, the judge explained the charges, the maximum
penalty under each charge, and the constitutional rights
appellant would waive by pleading no contest. The trial court
accepted the pleas and made a finding of guilty.
On June 21, 2016, appellant was sentenced to a jail term of
100 days with 90 days suspended and 0 days credit for time
served. Appellant was ordered to report to jail on September
27, 2016. Appellant was placed on one year of supervised
probation. He was to continue treatment at Signature Health
and follow all treatment recommendations. The court also
imposed a fine of $750, with $250 suspended, for resisting
arrest and a fine of $100 for aggravated disorderly conduct,
On July 21, 2016, appellant filed a timely notice of appeal
from the trial court's June 21, 2016 sentencing entry.
Appellant asserts two assignments of error on appeal:
[1.] The trial court committed prejudicial error in denying
Defendant-Appellant his speedy trial rights.
[2.] The trial court committed prejudicial error in accepting
a plea from the Defendant-Appellant without adequate inquiry