discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. Williams, Unpublished Decision (8-18-2004) No. C-020261, 2003-Ohio-2336 , at ¶ 26; see, also, State v. Herring (2002), 94 Ohio St.3d 246 , 251 , certiorari denied (2002), 537 U.S. 917 , 123 S.Ct. 301 , 154 L.Ed.2d 202 . 2 Ms. Tate was also indicted on the same charges as Appellant.

discussed Cited "see, e.g." United States v. Rafat Zakhary, A/K/A \Rezk Mekhaeil See United States v. Catoggio, 326 F.3d at 330 ; United States v. Stevens, 211 F.3d at 4 -5 & n. 2; see also United States v. Dando, 287 F.3d 1007 , 1110 n. 4, 1111 n. 6 (10th Cir.) (citing approvingly to Stevens in concluding that ninety-day limitation period is to protect victims rather than defendants), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 917 , 123 S.Ct. 301 , 154 L.Ed.2d 202 (2002); United States v. Grimes, 173 F.3d at 639 (emphasizing that “beneficiaries” of § 3664 procedures “are the victims, not the victimizers”).