Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State ex rel. Dubose v. Evans

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Seventh District

June 19, 2013

STATE ex rel. EDWARD DUBOSE, RELATOR,
v.
JUDGE JAMES EVANS, RESPONDENT.

For Relator: Edward Dubose, Pro Se #A378-874 Belmont Correctional Institution

For Respondent: Attorney Paul Gains Prosecuting Attorney Attorney Ralph Rivera Assistant Prosecuting Attorney

Hon. Joseph J. Vukovich Hon. Gene Donofrio Hon. Mary DeGenaro

OPINION AND JUDGMENT ENTRY

PER CURIAM

{¶ 1} On September 10, 2012, Edward Dubose filed a motion for additional jail time credit in the Mahoning County Common Pleas Court in case number 99CR345. On March 28, 2013, he filed a petition for a writ of mandamus in this court asking that we order the trial court to rule on his motion. In April, the state filed a response to his motion in the trial court and then asked this court for leave to respond to the request for a writ, which we granted.

{¶ 2} On April 25, 2013, the trial court granted the motion of Edward Dubose and gave him an additional 282 days of jail time credit. We thus deny the within petition as it has been rendered moot. In doing so, we note that when a petitioner believes that a judge has unnecessarily delayed in ruling or has otherwise refused to issue a judgment, the most appropriate petition to file is one seeking procedendo, asking that the court "proceed" to judgment. See State ex rel. Carnail v. McCormick, 126 Ohio St.3d 124, 2010-Ohio-2671, 931 N.E.2d 110, ¶ 32; State ex rel. Dehler v. Sutula, 74 Ohio St.3d 33, 35, 656 N.E.2d 332 (1995). Still, a mandamus action can be used instead. Id; State ex rel. Reynolds v. Basinger, 99 Ohio St.3d 303, 2003-Ohio-3631, 791 N.E.2d 459, ¶ 5.

{¶ 3} To be entitled to the writ, the petitioner must establish a clear legal right to the requested relief, a clear legal duty on the part of the judge to provide it, and the lack of an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. See State ex rel. Stanley v. D'Apolito, 7th Dist. No. 10MA114, 2010-Ohio-4850, ¶ 3. In ruling on a request for a writ of mandamus or procedendo in such a scenario, we do not tell the trial judge how to rule but instead we tell the judge whether or not they have to immediately take action in the case. Id.

{¶ 4} Thus, where a petitioner seeks to compel a trial court to rule on a pending motion, the trial court's grant or denial of the motion renders the action moot. State ex rel. Howard v. Skow, 102 Ohio St.3d 423, 811 N.E.2d 1128, 2004-Ohio-3652, ¶ 9 (explaining that the court reviewing a request for a writ can consider the trial court's acts after the petition is filed); State ex rel. Grove v. Nadel, 84 Ohio St.3d 252, 253, 703 N.E.2d 304 (1998) ("Neither procedendo nor mandamus will compel the performance of a duty that has already been performed."); State ex rel. Howard v. Belmont County Common Pleas Court, 7th Dist. No. 09BE22, 2009-Ohio-6811, ¶ 7. In conclusion, since the trial court has ruled on the motion for additional jail time credit, petitioner's request for a writ of mandamus is moot.

{¶ 5} The request for a writ is hereby denied.

{¶ 6} Final Order. Clerk to serve notice as provided by the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.