State ex rel. Mobarak v. Brown, 2024 Ohio 221

Soleiman Mobarak was indicted in 2012 for drug offenses involving “bath salts,” specifically for engaging in a pattern of corrupt activity, aggravated trafficking in drugs, and aggravated possession of drugs.
After a jury trial, Mobarak was convicted and sentenced to 35 years in prison.
On direct appeal, the Tenth District Court of Appeals initially overturned his convictions, holding the charged conduct was not criminalized at the time.
The Ohio Supreme Court reversed the appellate court, concluding that the relevant statutes (via statutory cross-references) did criminalize Mobarak’s conduct, and remanded for further proceedings; the court of appeals then reinstated his convictions.
In 2022, Mobarak sought a writ of mandamus to have his convictions vacated for alleged lack of trial court jurisdiction. The court of appeals dismissed the petition, citing Mobarak's adequate alternative legal remedies and lack of clear jurisdictional defect.
The Ohio Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal, holding Mobarak had not established entitlement to mandamus relief.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Did the trial court lack subject-matter jurisdiction?	Trial court had no jurisdiction because conduct wasn't a crime when committed	Common pleas courts have felony jurisdiction under R.C. 2931.03; no statute removed it	No patent and unambiguous lack of jurisdiction; court had statutory authority
Was mandamus an appropriate remedy?	Mandamus required to vacate convictions from lack of jurisdiction	Mobarak had ordinary appellate remedies available	Mandamus unavailable because adequate remedy existed
Were Ohio drug statutes unconstitutionally vague?	Statutes did not clearly prohibit controlled substance analogs at the time	Statutes, as interpreted by Supreme Court in Shalash, provided sufficient notice	Previously decided against Mobarak; not grounds for mandamus
Can prior, unsuccessful appeals justify extraordinary relief?	Prior appellate result was incorrect, so mandamus relief required	Prior appeals provide adequate legal remedy, regardless of outcome	Mandamus can't be used to relitigate previously decided issues

State v. Shalash, 148 Ohio St.3d 611 (interpretation of controlled-substance analog laws under Ohio statutes)
State v. Mobarak, 150 Ohio St.3d 26 (Supreme Court reversal establishing controlled substance analogs can be criminalized under existing law)
State v. Mobarak, 10th Dist. Franklin No. 14AP-517, 2015-Ohio-3007 (original appellate reversal of convictions)
State ex rel. Boler v. McCarthy, 170 Ohio St.3d 392 (subject-matter jurisdiction of common pleas courts over felonies, mandamus not appropriate method)
State ex rel. Love v. O’Donnell, 150 Ohio St.3d 378 (standards for mandamus relief)