[Cite as State v. Harris, 2017-Ohio-1150.]

STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 

 )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT 

COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) 

STATE OF OHIO 

 Appellee 

 v. 

ANTHONY HARRIS 

 Appellant 

C.A. Nos. 28229 

 28230 

 28231 

APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT 

ENTERED IN THE 

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS 

COUNTY OF SUMMIT, OHIO 

CASE Nos. CR 2015 07 2055 

CR 2015 07 2238 

CR 2015 09 2924 

DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY 

Dated: March 29, 2017 

 

CARR, Judge. 

{¶1} Appellant, Anthony Harris, appeals the judgment of the Summit County Court of 

Common Pleas. This Court affirms. 

I. 

{¶2} In 2015, the Summit County Grand Jury handed down three separate indictments 

charging Harris with a bevy of criminal offenses. Harris initially pleaded not guilty to all of the 

charges. Prior to the commencement of trial, Harris moved to have all of the charges against him 

dismissed on speedy trial grounds pursuant to R.C. 2945.71, et seq. The trial court denied the 

motion to dismiss on the basis that the State complied with the statutory timeframe and the 

frequent continuances in the matter were attributable to the defendant. Harris eventually 

withdrew his pleas of not guilty and pleaded guilty to a total of nine counts of forgery. The 
2 

 

remaining charges against Harris were dismissed. The trial court imposed a six-month prison 

term for each offense and ordered that all of the sentences in the three cases be served 

consecutively to each other. The sentencing entries for all three cases were journalized on April 

8, 2016. 

{¶3} On appeal, Harris raises one assignment of error. 

II. 

ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR 

THE TRIAL COURT COMMITTED REVERSIBLE ERROR WHEN IT 

FAILED TO DISMISS THE CHARGES AGAINST MR. HARRIS ON SPEEDY 

TRIAL GROUNDS[.] 

{¶4} In his sole assignment of error, Harris contends that the trial court erred by not 

dismissing the charges against him on statutory speedy trial grounds. This Court disagrees. 

{¶5} R.C. 2945.71 sets forth the statutory speedy trial right in Ohio. The Supreme 

Court of Ohio has long held that “[a] plea of guilty waives a defendant’s right to challenge his or 

her conviction on statutory speedy trial grounds[.]” State v. Kelley, 57 Ohio St.3d 127 (1991), at 

paragraph one of the syllabus. Even where a criminal defendant filed a motion to dismiss on 

statutory speedy trial grounds in the trial court, the defendant waives the right to raise that issue 

on appeal by entering a plea of guilty to the charges against him. State v. Dyson, 9th Dist. 

Wayne No. 09CA0055, 2010-Ohio-6452, ¶ 8-9. In this case, Harris pleaded guilty to numerous 

criminal charges after the trial court denied his motion to dismiss. Harris’ sole argument on 

appeal is that the trial court should have dismissed the charges against him pursuant to R.C. 

2945.71, et seq. As Harris waived this argument by pleading guilty, he cannot prevail on his 

assignment of error. See Dyson at ¶ 8-9. 

{¶6} Harris’ assignment of error is overruled. 
3 

 

III. 

{¶7} Harris’ assignment of error is overruled. The judgment of the Summit County 

Court of Common Pleas is affirmed. 

Judgment affirmed. 

 

 There were reasonable grounds for this appeal. 

 We order that a special mandate issue out of this Court, directing the Court of Common 

Pleas, County of Summit, State of Ohio, to carry this judgment into execution. A certified copy 

of this journal entry shall constitute the mandate, pursuant to App.R. 27. 

 Immediately upon the filing hereof, this document shall constitute the journal entry of 

judgment, and it shall be file stamped by the Clerk of the Court of Appeals at which time the 

period for review shall begin to run. App.R. 22(C). The Clerk of the Court of Appeals is 

instructed to mail a notice of entry of this judgment to the parties and to make a notation of the 

mailing in the docket, pursuant to App.R. 30. 

 Costs taxed to Appellant. 

 

 DONNA J. CARR 

 FOR THE COURT 

HENSAL, P. J. 

CALLAHAN, J. 

CONCUR. 

APPEARANCES: 

GREGORY A. PRICE, Attorney at Law, for Appellant. 

SHERRI BEVAN WALSH, Prosecuting Attorney, and HEAVEN DIMARTINO, Assistant 

Prosecuting Attorney, for Appellee.