Whitman v. Saffold, 2010-Ohio-2232

JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION

RELATOR: WILLIAM WHITMAN

vs.

RESPONDENT: SHIRLEY STRICKLAND SAFFOLD

JUDGMENT: WRIT DENIED

RELEASE DATE: May 17, 2010

FOR RELATOR

William Whitman, pro se
Inmate No. A581-451
Richland Correctional Institution
P. O. Box 8107
1001 Olivesburg Road
Mansfield, Ohio 44905

ATTORNEYS FOR RESPONDENT

William D. Mason
Cuyahoga County Prosecutor
By: James E. Moss
Assistant County Prosecutor
8th Floor Justice Center
1200 Ontario Street
Cleveland, Ohio 44113

PATRICIA A. BLACKMON, J.:

{¶ 1} Relator, William Whitman, requests that this court compel respondent judge to issue a ruling on his “motion to dismiss violation of 90 day fast and speedy trial” in the underlying case¹ filed on November 6, 2009.

{¶ 2} Respondent has filed a motion for summary judgment attached to which is a copy of the journal entry memorializing the jury‘s verdict and imposing sentence. The journal entry was received for filing by the clerk on February 2, 2010. Relator has not opposed the motion for summary judgment. Respondent argues that this action in procedendo is, therefore, moot. We agree.

{¶ 3} “It is well settled that a motion not ruled upon is implicitly deemed denied.”² Respondent has issued a journal entry reflecting the jury‘s verdict and imposing sentence. As a consequence, Whitman‘s request for relief in procedendo is moot. We also note that Whitman has appealed that judgment and his appeal is pending.

{¶ 4} Additionally, the complaint has several defects. Whitman did not comply with the requirement that he file an affidavit describing the actions he has filed in state and federal court during the last five years.³ He also failed to file an affidavit specifying the details of the claim.⁴ Each of these defects requires dismissal of the complaint.⁵ Furthermore, Whitman has not included the addresses of the parties in the caption,⁶ which may also be a ground for dismissal.⁷

{¶ 5} Accordingly, respondent‘s motion for summary judgment is granted. Relator to pay costs. The clerk is directed to serve upon the parties notice of this judgment and its date of entry upon the journal.⁸

Writ denied.

PATRICIA A. BLACKMON, JUDGE

MARY EILEEN KILBANE, P.J., and MELODY J. STEWART, J., CONCUR

Notes

1

State v. Whitman, Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case No. CR-526494.

2

Mosby v. Sanders, Cuyahoga App. No. 92605, 2009-Ohio-6459, at ¶9, n.1 (citation deleted). See also State v. Whitaker, Cuyahoga App. No. 83824, 2004-Ohio-5016, ¶32.

3

R.C. 2969.25.

4

Loc.App.R. 45(B)(1)(a).

5

Morris v. Bur. of Sentence Computation, Cuyahoga App. No. 89517, 2007-Ohio-1444.

6

Civ.R. 10(A).

7

Clarke v. McFaul, Cuyahoga App. No. 89447, 2007-Ohio-2520, at ¶5.

8

Civ.R. 58(B).

Case Details

Case Name: Whitman v. Saffold

Court Name: Ohio Court of Appeals, 8th District

Date Published: May 17, 2010

Citations: 2010-Ohio-2232; 94539

Docket Number: 94539

Court Abbreviation: Ohio Ct. App. 8th