State ex rel. Bradley v. Saffold

2012 Ohio 5081

• Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
• Decided: October 30, 2012
• Docket: 98512
• Status: Published

Opinion

[Cite as State ex rel. Bradley v. Saffold, 2012-Ohio-5081.]

Court of Appeals of Ohio

EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA

JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 98512

STATE OF OHIO, EX REL., HONESTO BRADLEY RELATOR

vs.

JUDGE SHIRLEY STRICKLAND SAFFOLD RESPONDENT

JUDGMENT: WRIT DENIED

Writ of Procedendo Motion No. 456424 Order No. 459431

RELEASE DATE: October 30, 2012 RELATOR

Honesto Bradley, Pro Se Inmate No. 621-054 2500 South Avon Belden Road Grafton Correctional Institution Grafton, Ohio 44044

ATTORNEYS FOR RESPONDENT

Timothy J. McGinty Cuyahoga County Prosecutor

James E. Moss Assistant County Prosecutor 9th Floor Justice Center 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113 PATRICIA ANN BLACKMON, A.J.:

{¶1} Honesto Bradley has filed a complaint for a writ of procedendo. Bradley

seeks an order from this court, which requires Judge Shirley Strickland Saffold to render

a ruling with regard to a motion for jail-time credit filed in State v. Bradley, Cuyahoga

C.P. No. CR-526262. For the following reasons, we grant Judge Saffold’s motion for

summary judgment.

{¶2} Initially, we find that Bradley’s complaint for a writ of procedendo is

procedurally defective. Loc.App.R. 45(B)(1)(a) provides that a complaint for an

extraordinary writ must be supported by a sworn affidavit that specifies the details of

Bradley’s claim. A simple statement that verifies that Bradley has reviewed the

complaint and that the contents are true and accurate does not satisfy the mandatory

requirement under Loc.App.R. 45(B)(1)(a). State ex rel. Jones v. McGinty, 8th Dist. No.

92602, 2009-Ohio-1258; State ex rel. Mayes v. Ambrose, 8th Dist. No. 91980,

2009-Ohio-25; James v. Callahan, 8th Dist. No. 89654, 2007-Ohio-2237.

{¶3} In addition, Bradley’s request for a writ of procedendo is moot. Attached

to the motion for summary judgment is a copy of a journal entry that demonstrates

Bradley was granted jail-time credit in the amount of 90 days. Judge Saffold has

discharged her duty to render a ruling with regard to the motion for jail-time credit that

renders the request for a writ of procedendo moot. State ex rel. Jerninghan v. Cuyahoga

Cty. Court of Common Pleas, 74 Ohio St.3d 278, 1996-Ohio-117, 658 N.E.2d 723; State ex rel. Gantt v. Coleman, 6 Ohio St.3d 5, 450 N.E.2d 1163 (1983). It must also be

noted that any error associated with the calculation of jail-time credit must be addressed

through an appeal. State ex rel. Britton v. Foley-Jones, 8th Dist. No. 73646, 1998 Ohio

App. LEXIS 856 (Mar. 5, 1998); State ex rel. Spates v. Sweeney, 8th Dist. No. 71986,

1997 Ohio App. LEXIS 1516 (Apri. 17, 1997).

{¶4} Accordingly, we grant Judge Saffold’s motion for summary judgment.

Bradley to pay costs. The court directs the clerk of court to serve all parties with notice

of this judgment and its date of entry upon the journal as required by Civ.R. 58(B).

{¶5} Writ denied.

PATRICIA ANN BLACKMON, ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE

COLLEEN CONWAY COONEY, J., and KENNETH A. ROCCO, J., CONCUR