Date: 11-27-2024

Case Style:

State of Ohio v. Michael Wood

Case Number:

Judge:

Court: Municipal Court, Clark County, Ohio

Plaintiff's Attorney: Clark County, Ohio Prosecuting Attorney

Defendant's Attorney:

Click Here For The Best Springfield Criminal Defense Lawyer Directory

Description:

Springfield, Ohio criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with driving under a suspension imposed for operating a vehicle while under the influence (DUI).

{¶ 2} As a result of a traffic stop that occurred on April 26, 2021, Wood was issued a traffic citation for various misdemeanor offenses, including one count of driving under an OVI suspension in violation of R.C. 4510.14(A). Wood had an initial appearance and was arraigned for that citation in Clark M.C. No. 21 TRD 3894 on April 29, 2021. On June 2, 2021, the State voluntarily dismissed the case without prejudice.

{¶ 3} A new traffic citation was issued and served on Wood on June 21, 2021, based on the same set of facts and circumstances as the April 26, 2021 traffic citation. Wood was charged with one count of driving under an OVI suspension in violation of R.C. 4510.14(A); one count of driving without a valid operator's license with a prior conviction in violation of R.C. 4510.12; one count of driving under a financial responsibility law suspension in violation of R.C. 4510.16; one count of driving under suspension in violation of R.C. 4510.111; and one count of failure to reinstate a license in violation of R.C. 4510.21. The charge of driving under an OVI suspension was a misdemeanor of the first degree. These charges proceeded in Clark M.C. No. 21 TRD 6293.

{¶ 4} Wood was arraigned in Case No. 21 TRD 6293 on June 25, 2021. At that time, Wood was not represented by counsel. The trial court entered a not guilty plea on his behalf and scheduled the case for a pretrial conference. No discussion was held on the record regarding Wood's right to a speedy trial, his right to counsel, or his right to demand a jury trial due to being charged with a first-degree misdemeanor.

{¶ 5} Wood signed a document indicating that he waived his right to a speedy trial
to discuss the matter with the prosecuting attorney at a pretrial and that the waiver tolled the time within which he must be brought to trial "from this date until the date of the pretrial." The document also included a notice stating that his case would be heard by the magistrate and that Wood consented to the same. Wood signed the document and wrote "ALL RIGHTS RESERVED." Wood signed a financial disclosure form stating he was indigent, and a box was checked on a separate pretrial form indicating Wood requested an evaluation for court-appointed counsel.

{¶ 6} On June 29, 2021, appointed counsel for Wood filed a notice of appearance, a plea of not guilty, and demands for a jury trial, a pretrial, a speedy trial, discovery, a bill of particulars, and a notice of intention to use evidence. A pretrial was held on July 14, 2021, at which Wood rejected a plea offer. Wood filed a motion to suppress on July 20, 2021, and a hearing on the motion was scheduled for August 18, 2021.

{¶ 7} Two days before the scheduled hearing, defense counsel filed a motion to withdraw as counsel because (1) Wood had hired private counsel in an unrelated felony case, and therefore he no longer met the requirements of indigency to be represented by the Public Defender's Office and, (2) "Defendant and counsel have differing opinions on how [Wood's] case should be tried in court." That same day, defense counsel filed a motion to continue the suppression hearing due to counsel's withdrawal. The magistrate granted both counsel's request to withdraw and the motion to continue the suppression hearing, which was rescheduled for September 8, 2021. The record does not reflect that a hearing was held on September 8, 2021, or that any new counsel was appointed to represent Wood. On September 13, 2021, a notice was filed setting a trial date for
November 3, 2021, before the magistrate.

{¶ 8} On October 18, 2021, Wood filed a pro se motion seeking dismissal of his case for various reasons, including that his statutory and constitutional speedy trial rights had been violated. The State did not file a response and no hearing was held. On October 20, 2021, the magistrate summarily denied Wood's motion to dismiss.

{¶ 9} On November 3, 2021, because a jury demand had been filed and the matter had not been resolved at a pretrial, the magistrate ordered that the case be reassigned to a judge. On November 5, 2021, the trial court scheduled a final pretrial conference for December 7, 2021, and a jury trial to commence on December 8, 2021.

{¶ 10} There is no record as to any proceedings that occurred on December 7, 2021. However, on December 8, 2021, Wood appeared for trial, stated that he had never waived his right to counsel, and he indicated that no counsel had been assigned to him following his counsel's withdrawal even though he was indigent. The trial court concluded that Wood had not waived his right to counsel, and the trial court continued the trial in order to appoint counsel to represent Wood. Notably, Wood also brought up that his motion to suppress had not been resolved, and he again asserted a violation of his right to a speedy trial, which the trial court rejected without conducting any analysis.

{¶ 11} On December 13, 2021, the court scheduled a hearing on Wood's motion to suppress for January 14, 2022. Although the record contains neither an order appointing new counsel nor a notice of appearance of counsel, on January 12, 2022, appointed counsel for Wood filed a motion to disqualify the prosecutor and requested that the court appoint a special prosecutor. On January 13, 2022, the State filed a response to Wood's motion to disqualify and also filed a motion to convert the January 14, 2022 motion to suppress hearing into a hearing on the motion to disqualify. The trial court granted the State's motion to convert the hearing.

{¶ 12} At the January 14, 2022 hearing, both parties made statements to the court, and the court instructed the parties to provide additional information before it would rule on the motion to disqualify. The trial court continued the hearing to February 4, 2022. Both parties requested a continuance of the February 4, 2022 hearing due to a snow emergency, and the trial court rescheduled the hearing for March 24, 2022.

{¶ 13} Prior to the hearing, the trial court overruled Wood's motion to disqualify the prosecutor and his request for a special prosecutor. The trial court scheduled a hearing on Wood's motion to suppress and motion to dismiss for March 18, 2022. The trial court also scheduled a jury trial for April 6, 2022.

{¶ 14} A hearing on the motion to suppress and motion to dismiss was held on March 18, 2022. The State did not present any evidence or make any argument with respect to Wood's motion to dismiss based on a violation of his right to a speedy trial. On March 25, 2022, the trial court overruled Wood's motion to suppress in its entirety and denied his motion to dismiss.

{¶ 15} The trial court stated the following regarding Wood's motion to dismiss: The Court has examined other issues raised in the Defendant's Motion to Dismiss. There is no factual basis in the record to support some of his claims. The Court finds nothing in the law which would result in a dismissal of the charges against the Defendant at this stage of the proceedings.
Entry (March 25, 2022), p. 4.

{¶ 16} On April 6, 2022, a jury trial was held. Wood was found guilty of driving under an OVI suspension, a misdemeanor of the first-degree. The other offenses had been dismissed by the State. The trial court sentenced Wood to 170 days in jail, ordered him to successfully complete a remedial driving course as a condition for the return of full driving privileges after the suspension period, and ordered him to pay a $500 fine and court costs. The trial court also imposed a class-seven license suspension for one year.
State v. Wood, 2024 Ohio 5597, C. A. 2022-CA-36 (Ohio App. Nov 27, 2024)

Outcome: Conviction vacated.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: