COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA NO. 70529 CITY OF MAYFIELD HEIGHTS : : ACCELERATED DOCKET : PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE : JOURNAL ENTRY : v. : AND : BRIAN T. WILSON : OPINION : : PER CURIAM DEFENDANT-APPELLANT : DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT OF DECISION: OCTOBER 10, 1996 CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Criminal appeal from Lyndhurst Municipal Court, Case No. 96-TRC-1177A-D. JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED AND REMANDED. DATE OF JOURNALIZATION: APPEARANCES: For Plaintiff-appellee: George J. Argie Mayfield Village Prosecutor Dominic J. Vitantonio Argie & Associates 6571 Wilson Mills Road Mayfield Village, Ohio 44143-3404 For Defendant-appellant: John W. Shryock, Esq. John Shryock Co., L.P.A. 38118 Second Street P.O. Box 1293 Willoughby, Ohio 44094 - 2 - PER CURIAM: An accelerated appeal is authorized pursuant to App.R. 11.1 and Loc.App.R. 25. The purpose of an accelerated docket is to allow an appellate court to render a brief and conclusionary decision. Crawford v. Eastland Shopping Mall Assn. (1983), 11 Ohio App.3d 158; App.R. 11.1(E). In the appeal sub judice, defendant-appellant Brian T. Wilson appeals on the accelerated docket from his plea of No Contest to the offenses of Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol in violation of Mayfield Heights Codified Ordinance 333.01(1) and of Weaving in violation of Mayfield Heights Codified Ordinance 331.38 and the imposition of an administrative license suspension by the arresting 1 officer pursuant to R.C. 4511.191. For the reasons adduced below, we affirm and remand. The sole assignment of error provides as follows: THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN CONVICTING AND PUNISHING THE DEFENDANT FOR A VIOLATION OF MAYFIELD HEIGHTS ORDINANCE 333.01(1) AND/OR 333.01(3) AS THOSE CONVICTIONS VIOLATE HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO BE PUT IN JEOPARDY ONLY ONCE. By appellant's own admission, the Mayfield Heights ordinances noted in the stated assignment of error duplicate their counterparts in the Revised Code, namely, R.C. 4511.19(A)(1) and (A)(3). Violations of these statutes mandate an automatic 1 The offenses of Driving With a Prohibited Level of Breath- Alcohol [Mayfield Heights Codified Ordinance 333.01(3)] and Speeding in excess of 100 m.p.h. [Mayfield Heights Codified Ordinance 333.03] were nolled as part of the plea bargain. - 3 - administrative license suspension by the arresting officer. R.C. 4511.191. It is urged by the appellant that the administrative license suspension precludes his subsequent conviction for driving under the influence by virtue of the Double Jeopardy Clauses of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 10 of the Ohio Constitution. This argument is without merit. The Supreme Court recently pronounced the following: 1. The Double Jeopardy Clauses of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 10 of the Ohio Constitution do not preclude criminal prosecution and trial of motorists for driving in violation of R.C. 4511.191 based upon, and subsequent to, the imposition of an administrative license suspension pursuant to R.C. 4511.191. State v. Gustafson (1996), 76 Ohio St.3d 425, paragraph one of the syllabus, 1996 Ohio LEXIS 552. Although not addressed by the parties, it is unclear whether the trial court terminated the initial administrative license suspension at the time of sentencing or whether that suspension extended beyond the sentencing date. This is important because any administrative license suspension imposed pursuant to R.C. 4511.191 which extends beyond the time of sentencing constitutes double jeopardy. Gustafson at 442. Accordingly, the conviction is affirmed and the matter remanded to the trial court with instructions to issue an order to the Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles to terminate the administrative license suspension herein - 4 - retroactive to the date of sentencing on the underlying convictions in this case. Gustafson at 444. Assignment overruled. Judgment affirmed and case remanded. - 5 - It is ordered that appellee recover of appellant its costs herein taxed. The Court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal. It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this Court directing the Lyndhurst Municipal Court to carry this judgment into execution. The defendant's conviction having been affirmed, any bail pending appeal is terminated. Case remanded to the trial court for execution of sentence. A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure. JAMES D. SWEENEY, P.J. PATRICIA A. BLACKMON, J. TIMOTHY E. McMONAGLE, J., CONCURS IN JUDGMENT ONLY. N.B. This entry is an announcement of the court's decision. See App.R. 22(B), 22(D) and 26(A); Loc.App.R. 27. This decision will be journalized and will become the judgment and order of the court pursuant to App.R. 22(E) unless a motion for reconsideration with supporting brief, per App.R. 26(A), is filed within ten (10) days of the announcement of the court's decision. The time period for review by the Supreme Court of Ohio shall begin to run upon the journalization of this court's announcement of decision by the clerk per App.R. 22(E). See, also S.Ct.Prac.R. II, Section 2(A)(1). .