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 v. Bindus

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, Cuyahoga

November 16, 2017

STATE OF OHIO PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE
v.
DONALD BINDUS DEFENDANT-APPELLANT

         Criminal Appeal from the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case No. CR-04-448745-ZA

          APPELLANT Donald Bindus, pro se Inmate No. 482059

          ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Michael C. O'Malley Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Anthony Thomas Miranda Assistant Prosecuting Attorney

          BEFORE: Keough, A.J., S. Gallagher, J., and Celebrezze, J.

          JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION

          KATHLEEN ANN KEOUGH, A.J.

         {¶1} Defendant-appellant, Donald Bindus, appeals from the trial court's decision denying his motion to compel. For the reasons that follow, we affirm the trial court's decision.

         {¶2} In 2005, Bindus pleaded guilty to several counts of rape, gross sexual imposition, and kidnapping; he was ordered to serve the agreed sentence of 15 years in prison with no judicial release. Subsequently, Bindus moved the trial court to withdraw his plea (March, October, and November 2005), set aside his sentence (2006), grant habeas corpus (2006), order DNA testing (2007), grant judicial release (2013), and vacate a void judgment (2013). Each request was denied.

         {¶3} In March 2017, Bindus filed a "motion to compel, " but failed to request the production of anything. Instead, Bindus challenged the form of the indictment against him and the trial court's subject matter jurisdiction. The trial court summarily denied his motion.

         {¶4} Bindus now appeals, raising the following four assignments of error:

I. The trial court erred when it failed to confirm the validation of said indictments since the documents returned to the clerk were actually nineteen individual indictments, not a single indictment containing nineteen counts, denying the appellant his Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights to the United States Constitution and his rights under the Supremacy Clause, Article VI.
II. The trial court erred when it failed to establish any subject matter jurisdiction in this case, violating the appellant's Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights to the United States Constitution.
III. The trial court erred when it failed to produce a valid indictment denying the appellant his Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights to the United States Constitution and his right to due process.
IV. The trial court erred when it failed to produce a legally formatted indictment that did not contain carbon copy counts which placed the defendant within a violation of the Double Jeopardy Clause denying the appellant's Fifth Amendment rights to the United States Constitution.

         {¶5} Bindus's motion filed with the trial court is actually an untimely petition for postconviction relief. Pursuant to R.C. 2953.21(A)(2), a petition must be filed within 365 days of the expiration date for filing a direct appeal. In this case, Bindus's petition was filed over ten years after that expiration ...


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.