State ex rel. Chapman v. Gallagher

2023 Ohio 379

Opinion

[Cite as State ex rel. Chapman v. Gallagher, 2023-Ohio-379.]

COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO

EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA

STATE OF OHIO EX REL., LITRELL CHAPMAN, :

Relator, : No. 112156 v. :

JUDGE HOLLIE GALLAGHER, :

Respondent. :

JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION

JUDGMENT: WRIT DENIED DATED: February 8, 2023

Writ of Mandamus Motion No. 560390 Order No. 561623

Appearances:

Litrell Chapman, pro se.

Michael C. O’Malley, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and James E. Moss, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for respondent.

SEAN C. GALLAGHER, P.J.:

Litrell Chapman, the relator, has filed a complaint for a writ of

mandamus. Chapman seeks an order from this court that requires Judge Hollie

Gallagher, the respondent, to issue a final appealable order in State v. Chapman, Cuyahoga C.P. No. CR-96-345622(A). We decline to issue a writ of mandamus

because the request to require Judge Gallagher to issue a final appealable order is

moot and the complaint for mandamus fails to comply with R.C. 2969.25(C).

Attached to Judge Gallagher’s motion for summary judgment are

copies of judgment entries, journalized December 5, 2022, that indicate Judge

Gallagher “re-sentenced” Chapman. The journal entries set forth: (1) the sentencing

journal entry, journalized July 12, 2017, is vacated; (2) Chapman is resentenced; (3)

the counts and specifications of which Chapman was convicted; (4) the sentence

imposed by Judge Gallagher for each count and specification; (5) Judge Gallagher’s

signature; and (6) time stamp, by the clerk of courts, indicating entry upon the

journal. Judge Gallagher has issued a sentencing journal entry that complies with

Crim.R. 32(C) and R.C. 2505.02. See also State v. Lester, 130 Ohio St.3d 303, 2011-

Ohio-5204, 958 N.E.2d 142; State v. Baker, 119 Ohio St.3d 197, 2008-Ohio-3330,

893 N.E.2d 63. Chapman’s request for a writ of mandamus is thus moot, and any

errors of law contained in the resentencing entries are subject to appeal. State ex

rel. Allen v. Goulding, 156 Ohio St.3d 337, 2019-Ohio-858, 126 N.E.3d 1104; State

ex rel. Culgan v. Kimbler, 132 Ohio St.3d 480, 2012-Ohio-3310, 974 N.E.2d 88;

State ex rel. Hudson v. Sutula, 131 Ohio St.3d 177, 2012-Ohio-554, 962 N.E.2d 798.

In addition, Chapman’s complaint for mandamus is defective.

Chapman has failed to comply with R.C. 2969.25(C), which mandates that the

complaint contain a statement certified by the institutional cashier setting forth the

balance in the inmate’s account for the preceding six months of incarceration. State ex rel. Swopes v. McCormick, Slip Opinion No. 2022-Ohio-4408; State ex rel. Neil

v. French, 153 Ohio St.3d 271, 2018-Ohio-2692, 104 N.E.3d 764. The failure to

comply with the mandatory requirements of R.C. 2969.25(C) requires dismissal of

the complaint for mandamus. Finally, the failure to comply with R.C. 2969.25(C)

cannot be cured by an amended complaint. State ex rel. Russell v. Ohio Dept. of

Rehab. & Corr., 161 Ohio St.3d 312, 2020-Ohio-4788, 162 N.E.3d 800; State ex rel.

Hall v. Mohr, 140 Ohio St.3d 297, 2014-Ohio-3735, 17 N.E.3d 581.

Accordingly, we grant Judge Gallagher’s motion for summary

judgment. Costs to Chapman. The court directs the clerk of courts to serve all

parties with notice of this judgment and the date of entry upon the journal as

required by Civ.R. 58(B).

Writ denied.

_______________________________ SEAN C. GALLAGHER, PRESIDING JUDGE

ANITA LASTER MAYS, A.J., and EMANUELLA D. GROVES, J., CONCUR