subdivision is a complete waiver in Ohio

2021This would result in undue delay and expense and possibly prejudice the state.” Tackett, supra, at ¶ 21 , quoting State v. Burton, 39 Ohio App.3d 151, 151 , 530 N.E.2d 955 (6th Dist. 1988).

2021This would result in undue delay and expense and possibly prejudice the state.” Tackett, supra, at ¶ 21 , quoting State v. Burton, 39 Ohio App.3d 151, 151 , 530 N.E.2d 955 (6th Dist. 1988).

2022State v. Tate, 59 Ohio St.2d 50, 52 , 391 N.E.2d 738 (1979).

2022State v. Tate, 59 Ohio St.2d 50, 52 , 391 N.E.2d 738 (1979).

2025(Emphasis added.) Id.

2021This would result in undue delay and expense and possibly prejudice the state.” Tackett, supra, at ¶ 21 , quoting State v. Burton, 39 Ohio App.3d 151, 151 , 530 N.E.2d 955 (6th Dist. 1988).

2008R. 23(A) provides, there is no absolute right to a jury trial in cases where the defendant has been charged with a "petty offense." See also, *Page 5 Hoffman v. State (1918), 98 Ohio St. 137 , 120 N.E. 234 ; City of Mentor v. Giordano (1967), 9 Ohio St.2d 140 , 224 N.E.2d 343 .

2008R. 23(A) provides, there is no absolute right to a jury trial in cases where the defendant has been charged with a "petty offense." See also, *Page 5 Hoffman v. State (1918), 98 Ohio St. 137 , 120 N.E. 234 ; City of Mentor v. Giordano (1967), 9 Ohio St.2d 140 , 224 N.E.2d 343 .

2007Failure to demand a jury trial as provided in this subdivision is a complete waiver of the right thereto." {¶ 9} R.C. 2945.05 provides that a defendant may waive a properly demanded jury trial, but that such waiver "shall be in writing, signed by the defendant, and filed * * * and made part of the record * * *." See, also, State v. Pless (1996), 74 Ohio St.3d 333 , 658 NE.2d 766 , paragraph one of the syllabus.

2006Generally, trial counsel's failure to request a jury trial is a strategic decision, "and will not be considered as a meritorious reason for reversal as an ineffective assistance of counsel claim." State v. Woods (Mar. 5, 1997), Medina App. No. 2589-MA; State v. Moore (Nov. 3, 1993), Ashland App. No. 1008; State v. Toney , Wayne App. No. 1008; 2004-Ohio-4877 . {¶ 16} Moreover, defendant has not demonstrated how the decision to have a bench trial resulted in prejudice to her.

2005Failure to demand a jury trial as provided in this subdivision is a complete waiver of the right thereto." {¶ 11} Crim.R. 2 provides the following definitions: {¶ 12} "* * * {¶ 13} "(C) `Serious offense' means any felony, and any misdemeanor for which the penalty prescribed by law includes confinement for more than six months. {¶ 14} "(D) `Petty offense' means a misdemeanor other than serious offense." {¶ 15} In Lewis v. United States (1996), 518 U.S. 322 , the United States Supreme Court stated: {¶ 16} "The Sixth Amendment reserves the jury trial right to defendants accused of serious crimes.

2005City of Cleveland Heights v. Jackson, Cuyahoga App. No. 82958, 2003-Ohio-6486, ¶ 9 .

2004Where a jury demand is not timely filed with respect to the originally scheduled trial date, a continuance of the trial will renew the time within which to file a jury demand." Tallmadge v. DeGraft-Biney (1988), 39 Ohio St.3d 300 , syllabus. {¶ 14} We note that Lowe's second jury demand was filed on October 24, 2003, only six days before the scheduled bench trial that was set for October 30, 2003.

2004Failure to demand a jury trial as provided in this subdivision is a complete waiver of the right thereto." {¶ 9} The misdemeanor assault charges in this case constituted "petty offenses." Crim.R. 2(C) and (D); City of South Euclid v. Musheyev, Cuyahoga App. No. 83408, 2004-Ohio-3118, at ¶ 7 ; R.C. 2929.21 (B). {¶ 10} On September 9, 2002, appellants filed identical motions for a continuance.

2003Failure to demand a jury trial as provided in this subdivision is a complete waiver of the right thereto." As noted by the court in State v. Pflanz (1999), 135 Ohio App.3d 338 , 339 : "A defendant in a petty offense case waives his right to a jury unless the defendant has filed a demand for a jury trial.

1990Failure to demand a jury trial as provided in this subdivision is a complete waiver of the right thereto." In State v. Grimsley (1982), 3 Ohio App. 3d 265 the court held that it was error when the trial court denied a defendant's second demand for a jury trial which was timely filed pursuant to Crim.