State ex rel. Davenport v. State (Slip Opinion)
146 Ohio St. 3d 255
| Ohio | 2016Background
- Davenport, an inmate, filed a mandamus petition in the Tenth District Court of Appeals seeking the trial court to rule on pending motions in his underlying criminal case.
- He filed an affidavit of indigency in the court of appeals but did not provide a statement of the amount in his inmate account for the preceding six months as required by R.C. 2969.25(C)(1).
- The court of appeals’ magistrate recommended dismissal for Davenport’s failure to comply with R.C. 2969.25; no objections were filed, and the court adopted the magistrate’s decision and dismissed.
- The court of appeals dismissed the case, holding that the mandatory requirements of R.C. 2969.25 justify dismissal when not complied with.
- The Supreme Court affirmed the court of appeals’ judgment and denied Davenport’s motion for oral argument.
- Judgment affirmed and motion denied.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether failure to provide six months of inmate-account balances requires dismissal under R.C. 2969.25(C). | Davenport | State | Yes, dismissal affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Boles v. Knab, 129 Ohio St.3d 222 (2011-Ohio-2859) (mandatory requirements; dismissal when not complied with)
- State ex rel. White v. Bechtel, 99 Ohio St.3d 11 (2003-Ohio-2262) (mandatory nature of R.C. 2969.25)
- State ex rel. McGrath v. McDonnell, 126 Ohio St.3d 511 (2010-Ohio-4726) (dismissal for noncompliance with act requirements)