Ohio R. Superi. Ct. 39
Ohio. R. Superi. Ct. 39
Commentary (July 1, 1997)
Rule 39 consolidates the time limits contained in former C.P. Sup. R. 8 and 8.01 and M.C. Sup. R. 5. The provisions of C.P. Sup. R. 8.01(B) have been moved to Rule 42. Division (B)(5) is a new time guideline and reporting requirement.
The time limits applicable to criminal cases are for the purpose of facilitating the prompt disposition of criminal cases. These time limits in no way affect the statutorily mandated limits contained in R.C. 2945.71. However, the failure to dispose of cases within these time guidelines may result in intervention by the Chief Justice. While the administrative guidelines set out in Rule 8(B) are keyed to the date of arraignment, the requirement of R.C. 2945.71 begins to run from the date of arrest.
Although criminal cases are not reported as filed on Common Pleas Form A until the accused is arraigned on an indictment or information, the responsibility of the court of common pleas for the processing of the case beings upon receipt of the papers in the case pursuant to Crim. R. 5(B)(7). When no final action has been taken by a grand jury within sixty days after bindover, the court or administrative judge should dismiss the charge unless the prosecutor is, for good cause, granted a continuance. The key date for purposes of division (B)(2) is the date of bindover. Thus, the summoning of a grand jury under Crim. R. 8 should not be unduly delayed. Although R.C. 2945.71 does not mandate a time limit for completion of the grand jury process, the statutory time limit runs from the date of arrest, including time taken in the grand jury process.
The dismissal contemplated by division (B)(2) is not a dismissal with prejudice.
Crim. R. 5(B)(1) provides time guidelines for preliminary hearings only. Crim. R. 5(A)(2) and 5(B)(1) each contain provisions pertaining to the extension of preliminary hearing time limits. Crim. R. 45(A) explains the method to be used in computing time. Crim. R. 45(B) provides for the enlargement or reduction of time provisions.
Division (B)(1) provides for the journalization of all actions taken pursuant to section 2945.72 of the Revised Code, Crim. R. 5(A)(2), 5(B)(1) or 45(B), which either extend or shorten the time periods provided in section 2945.71 of the Revised Code or Crim. R. 5. The journal entry must include the fact of the extension or shortening of time and a statement of the reasons therefor to provide a record should any question arise concerning compliance with section 2945.71 of the Revised Code.
Rule 39(B)(4) Sentencing
If the defendant is available, the court must take action within fifteen days of the verdict or finding of guilty or within fifteen days of the receipt of a completed presentence investigation report. This action may be to impose sentence, to place on probation, or to hold a hearing on the report.
Although R.C. 2945.71 is satisfied if the accused is brought to trial within the appropriate period from arrest, the Form A report keys termination to the sentencing or granting of probation. Thus, the six month guidelines contained on the report form includes any period of time between the commencement of trial and the imposition of sentence.
Failure to meet the time standard of this section must be reported to the administrative judge for corrective action. In a single judge division, any failure is to be reported to the Case Management Section.
The fifteen day time limit of division (B)(4) of this rule should not be confused with the requirement of Sup. R. 7 that the journal entry be made within thirty days of the judgment.
Rule 39(B)(5) Post-conviction relief petitions; death penalty cases
Prior to July 1997, no reporting requirements existed for post-conviction relief petitions, and these petitions were treated as motions in previously terminated cases. In view of the public policies reflected by the November 1994 constitutional amendment abolishing intermediate appeals in death penalty cases and legislation affecting post-conviction relief actions (Am. Sub. S.B. 4 of the 121st General Assembly, effective September 21, 1995), it is imperative that courts provide timely consideration of death penalty cases and ensuing post-conviction relief petitions in those cases. To assist in the management of post-conviction relief petitions in death penalty cases, division (B)(5) of this rule establishes a one hundred eighty day time guideline for the disposition of these petitions and provides for the monthly reporting of the status of the petitions. The one hundred eighty day time guideline is identical to the guideline contained in Rule 35 of the Ohio Rules of Criminal Procedure, effective July 1, 1997.
Although the assigned judge is ultimately responsible for the termination of the case and is so designated on the report form, the administrative judge is responsible for tracking and reporting the status of these petitions.
Rule 39(C) Reporting
The time limits imposed by this rule are for administrative purposes only. Failure to comply with these time limits does not give rise to the sanctions imposed by R.C. 2945.71. However, failure to dispose of cases within these times limits may result in the intervention of the administrative judge and the Chief Justice.
The reports required by this rule should be submitted monthly to the administrative judge or the Case Management Section. A case should be listed on this report for each month during which it is delinquent.
Although no specific form is prescribed for this report, it should contain, at a minimum, the style of the case, the offense charged, the date of its filing, an explanation of the delay in disposition, and the date on which it is anticipated that the case will be completed.
Failure to meet the time standard of this section must be reported to the administrative judge for corrective action. In a single-judge division, any failure is to be reported to the Case Management Section.
.