Case ID: ohio-st-3d_109/html/1403-08.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

2006-0370.
    State v. Palmer.
   Portage App. No. 2004-P-0106, 2005-Ohio-6710. On review of order certifying a conflict. The court determines that a conflict exists. The parties are to brief the issue stated at page 3 of the court of appeals’ Judgment Entry filed February 13, 2006:

“Whether a defendant’s failure to timely respond to the State’s request for reciprocal discovery is a period of delay occasioned by the ’neglect’ or ’improper act’ of the defendant that tolls the speedy trial time pursuant to R.C. 2945.72(D), even in the absence of a Crim.R. 16 demand for discovery.”

Resnick and O’Donnell, JJ., dissent.

The conflict case is State v. Larsen (Mar. 22, 1995), Medina App. No. 2363-M, 1995 WL 125577.

Sua sponte, cause consolidated with 2006-0022, State v. Palmer, Portage App. No. 2004-P-0106, 2005-Ohio-6710.