State ex rel. Jackson v. Official Court Reporter
2012 Ohio 3968
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- Jackson, pro se, seeks a writ of mandamus to compel various actions related to State v. Jackson (App. No. 98157) and CR-527856.
- Relief sought includes approval of App.R. 9(C)/9(D) statements, rulings on pending motions, findings on postconviction relief, withdrawal of original papers, and a free copy of the transcript.
- The appellate court sua sponte amended the record to App.R. 9(A) completeness for the State v. Jackson appeal.
- The trial court had denied several of Jackson's motions (transcript preparation, appointment of reporter, and appointment of counsel) prior to the mandamus petition.
- The court held Jackson failed to show a clear legal right or a corresponding duty on the respondents, or an available ordinary-law remedy.
- The writ was denied, and costs were allocated to Jackson.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did Jackson show a clear right and duty to compel App.R. 9(C)/9(D) statements? | Jackson seeks approval of the statements. | Ambrose had no duty; record amended to 9(A); moot. | No clear right or duty; moot. |
| Are there duties to issue rulings on pending motions? | Jackson requests rulings on motions filed in CR-527856. | No duty; motions resolved previously; moot. | No duty; moot. |
| Must Judge Ambrose issue findings of fact and conclusions of law on postconviction relief? | Requests FG/LCOL on untimely petition. | No such duty; petition untimely; no FG/LCOL required. | No duty; petition untimely. |
| Does Clerk of Courts have a duty to withdraw original papers? | Withdraw original papers from App. No. 98157. | Clerk must transfer original papers under App.R. 9, not withdraw. | No withdrawal duty; transfer duty exists. |
| Is the Court Reporter’s Office obliged to provide a free transcript? | Request for free transcript for pending appeal. | No hearing; no transcript necessary; indigent status not guaranteed transcript at state expense. | No duty; transcript not required. |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Ney v. Niehaus, 33 Ohio St.3d 118 (1987) (mandamus elements require clear legal right and duty, and no adequate remedy)
- State ex rel. Harris v. Rhodes, 54 Ohio St.2d 41 (1978) (mandamus showing of duty and remedy necessary)
- State ex rel., Natl. City Bank v. Bd. of Edn., 52 Ohio St.2d 81 (1977) (additional mandamus standards for relief)
- Jerninghan v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas, 74 Ohio St.3d 278 (1996) (mootness principles in mandamus context)
- Gantt v. Coleman, 6 Ohio St.3d 5 (1983) (duty and record considerations in mandamus)
- Griffin v. Illinois, 351 U.S. 12 (1934) (due process limits on providing transcript at state's expense)