State ex rel. Sands v. Court of Common Pleas
2017 Ohio 8532
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Joseph A. Sands (relator) is serving a 20-year state sentence for engaging in a pattern of corrupt activity and conspiracy convictions arising from a plot to murder several public officials; he also received a federal sentence related to the plot.
- Sands previously litigated his convictions on direct appeal and in other post-conviction filings; this court affirmed earlier state convictions and the Ohio Supreme Court declined a delayed appeal.
- Sands filed an original action for a writ of mandamus in the Eleventh District against Judge Vincent A. Culotta (respondent), asserting multiple defects in his indictment, conviction, sentencing, and custody.
- Judge Culotta moved to dismiss (or for summary judgment); the court treated the matter as a mandamus petition subject to standard mandamus elements (clear legal right, clear legal duty, and lack of adequate remedy).
- The court found Sands failed to specify any concrete relief requested in the petition and that the asserted errors were matters that could have been raised on direct appeal or otherwise through normal appellate process.
- The court granted respondent’s motion and dismissed the petition for a writ of mandamus.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sentencing merger and expired term | Sands: conspiracy convictions merged; conspiracy sentence expired; release warranted | Respondent: sentencing/appeal issues are for direct appeal, not mandamus | Dismissed — cannot obtain relief by mandamus; should have been raised on appeal |
| Sufficiency/indictment defects | Sands: indictment insufficient and failed to charge offenses | Respondent: alleged defects are appellate issues and not grounds for mandamus | Dismissed — could have been raised on direct appeal |
| Sufficiency of evidence / time frame for pattern-of-corrupt-activity | Sands: conviction lacked sufficient evidence and inadequate time frame for RICO-type charge | Respondent: factual/sufficiency claims belong on appeal/post-conviction review | Dismissed — not a proper mandamus claim; appellate route available |
| Procedural sentencing/judgment entry errors (renumbering, factual findings for consecutive sentences, entries disposing counts) | Sands: court erred in renumbering counts, failed to make required factual findings, and failed to dispose of each count | Respondent: procedural complaints are appealable or reviewable in ordinary course | Dismissed — mandamus inappropriate; petition fails to show clear right to relief |
| Custody transfer without governor’s warrant | Sands: custody exchanged between state and federal authorities without Governor-signed warrant | Respondent: custody/supply-of-process issues are not proper mandamus relief here | Dismissed — claim not properly pleaded for mandamus and could be raised by other remedies |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Zimmerman v. Tompkins, 75 Ohio St.3d 447 (1996) (elements for mandamus relief)
- State ex rel. Dehler v. Sutula, 74 Ohio St.3d 33 (1995) (relator bears burden to establish mandamus elements)
- State ex rel. Cochran v. Boardman Twp. Bd. of Trustees, 196 Ohio App.3d 185 (2011) (mandamus jurisdiction and standards)
- Mitchell v. Speedy Car X, Inc., 127 Ohio App.3d 229 (1998) (standard of review for Civ.R. 12(B)(6) dismissal)
- Taylor v. London, 88 Ohio St.3d 137 (2000) (motion-to-dismiss standard quoting O’Brien)
- O’Brien v. Univ. Community Tenants Union, Inc., 42 Ohio St.2d 242 (1975) (standard for Civ.R. 12(B)(6))
- Fanbulleh v. Strahan, 73 Ohio St.3d 666 (1995) (pleading construction on dismissal)
- Mitchell v. Lawson Milk Co., 40 Ohio St.3d 190 (1988) (presume truth of complaint allegations on motion to dismiss)