2014 Ohio 5505
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- Relator Deion Sweeting, pro se and incarcerated, filed a petition for a writ of mandamus (Feb 26, 2014) against Noble County Clerk Karen Starr and former Prosecutor Clifford Sickler alleging failure to follow R.C. 2935.09 and 2935.10 procedures for citizen-filed affidavits seeking criminal charges.
- Sweeting alleged he sent a compliant affidavit to Clerk Starr in December 2013 but did not attach a copy to the petition.
- Clerk Starr answered and moved to dismiss; the court converted factual issues to the summary judgment track and ordered cross-motions for summary judgment.
- Starr filed a motion for summary judgment supported by an affidavit stating she did not receive any complaint/petition/affidavit from Sweeting in December 2013; Sweeting did not respond to the motion.
- The court treated the uncontroverted affidavit and Sweeting’s lack of response as dispositive and found no duty arose under R.C. 2935.09(D) or R.C. 2935.10 because no affidavit was filed.
- The court granted summary judgment for both respondents, denied the writ, taxed costs to Sweeting, and entered final judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Clerk Starr failed to comply with R.C. 2935.09(D) by not forwarding Sweeting's citizen affidavit | Sweeting: he sent a compliant affidavit in Dec. 2013 and Starr failed to forward it to a reviewing official | Starr: she did not receive any affidavit/complaint in Dec. 2013, so she had no duty to forward anything | Court: No genuine issue — Starr did not receive an affidavit; no duty arose; summary judgment for Starr |
| Whether Prosecutor Sickler failed to perform review duties under R.C. 2935.10 | Sweeting: Sickler, as reviewing official, failed to review or act on the affidavit | Sickler: no affidavit was forwarded/received, so no review duty arose | Court: No duty to review without an affidavit; summary judgment for Sickler |
| Whether summary judgment was appropriate given the record | Sweeting: alleged factual sending of affidavit (unsupported by evidence) | Respondents: supported by Starr's affidavit and Sweeting’s failure to respond or produce evidence | Court: Summary judgment appropriate — no genuine issue of material fact; respondents entitled to judgment as a matter of law |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Boylen v. Harmon, 107 Ohio St.3d 370 (2006) (after clerk accepts affidavits for filing under R.C. 2935.09, subsequent proceedings proceed under R.C. 2935.10)
- State ex rel. Parsons v. Fleming, 68 Ohio St.3d 509 (1994) (summary judgment standard: no genuine issue of material fact and movant entitled to judgment as a matter of law)