2019 Ohio 954
Ohio2019Background
- Appellant Orlando L. Powe, a state inmate convicted in 2002 of murder, felonious assault, and endangering children, filed a mandamus petition in the Ninth District Court of Appeals against Summit County Common Pleas Judge Jill Lanzinger.
- Powe alleged the trial court lacked jurisdiction because a criminal complaint was never filed, and asked the court of appeals to compel Judge Lanzinger to produce a properly filed complaint or dismiss the conviction under Crim.R. 48(B).
- Powe sought waiver of filing fees and submitted a prison-prepared "Financial Disclosure/Affidavit of Indigency" showing only his prison employment and $20 monthly wages.
- R.C. 2969.25(C) requires an inmate seeking a fee waiver to provide the account balance for each of the preceding six months and a statement of all other cash and things of value owned at filing.
- The Ninth District dismissed the petition sua sponte for failure to comply with R.C. 2969.25(C); Powe appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court.
- The Supreme Court affirmed, holding the submitted form did not satisfy the statute and that the reason for noncompliance or acceptance by the clerk was irrelevant to statutory compliance.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Powe complied with R.C. 2969.25(C) when seeking fee-waiver | The prison cashier prepared the required form; Powe cannot control its content so he should not be penalized | The submitted form omitted required six-month account balances and list of assets; noncompliance justified dismissal | Dismissal affirmed; form did not meet R.C. 2969.25(C) |
| Whether substantial compliance with R.C. 2969.25(C) suffices | Implied that imperfect form was sufficient because clerk accepted filing | Statute requires strict compliance; substantial compliance is not allowed | R.C. 2969.25(C) does not allow substantial compliance; strict compliance required |
| Whether clerk acceptance cures statutory noncompliance | Powe argued clerk’s acceptance showed compliance | Clerk has no authority to enforce statutory content; local rule directs acceptance of affidavits generally | Clerk acceptance does not cure failure to meet R.C. 2969.25(C) |
| Proper remedy for noncompliance with R.C. 2969.25(C) | N/A (Powe sought relief on jurisdictional grounds) | Statutory noncompliance is grounds for dismissal of the complaint | Petition properly dismissed for failure to comply with filing requirements |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Pamer v. Collier, 108 Ohio St.3d 492, 844 N.E.2d 842 (2006) (failure to comply with R.C. 2969.25(C) is grounds for dismissal)
- State ex rel. Neil v. French, 153 Ohio St.3d 271, 104 N.E.3d 764 (2018) (R.C. 2969.25(C) does not allow substantial compliance)