State ex rel. Jackson v. Calabrese
This text of 2014 Ohio 3827 (State ex rel. Jackson v. Calabrese) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
[Cite as State ex rel. Jackson v. Calabrese, 2014-Ohio-3827.]
Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 101556
STATE OF OHIO, EX REL., LAWRENCE B. JACKSON RELATOR
vs.
JUDGE DEENA R. CALABRESE RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT: WRIT DENIED
Writ of Mandamus Motion No. 476793 Order No. 477321
RELEASE DATE: September 3, 2014 RELATOR
Lawrence B. Jackson, pro se Inmate No. 621-066 Lake Erie Correctional Institution 501 Thompson Road Conneaut, Ohio 44030
ATTORNEYS FOR RESPONDENT
Timothy J. McGinty Cuyahoga County Prosecutor James E. Moss Assistant County Prosecutor The Justice Center - 9th Floor 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113 MARY EILEEN KILBANE, J.:
{¶1} Lawrence B. Jackson has filed a complaint for a writ of mandamus.
Jackson seeks an order from this court that requires Judge Deena R. Calabrese to issue a
journal entry with regard to the denial of a motion to suppress filed in State v. Jackson,
Cuyahoga C.P. No. CR-554303. Judge Calabrese has filed a motion for summary
judgment, which we grant for the following reasons.
{¶2} Initially, we find that Jackson has failed to provide a statement that sets
forth the balance in his inmate account for the preceding six months as certified by the
institutional cashier. See R.C. 2969.25(C). Jackson’s failure to comply with the
mandatory requirement of R.C. 2969.25(C) renders his complaint defective and thus
subject to dismissal. State ex rel. Gooden v. Kagel, 138 Ohio St.3d 343, 2014-Ohio-869,
6 N.E.2d 1170.
{¶3} In addition, Jackson’s request for a writ of mandamus is moot. Attached to
the motion for summary judgment is a copy of a judgment entry, journalized on
September 9, 2011, which demonstrates that Jackson’s motion to suppress was denied.
{¶4} Finally, the transcript of proceedings, attached to Jackson’s complaint as
Appendix A, demonstrates that Judge Calabrese stated her factual findings on the record,
thus complying with any need for rendering findings of fact and conclusions of law.
This court has previously held that a defendant is not prejudiced by a trial court’s
failure to comply with a defendant’s request for findings of fact on the court’s suppression ruling where the record provides an appellate court with a sufficient basis to
review a defendant’s assignments of error. See State v. King, 136 Ohio App.3d 377, 381,
736 N.E.2d 921 (8th Dist.1999); State v. Almalik, 41 Ohio App.3d 101, 534 N.E.2d 898
(8th Dist. 1987); State v. Fannin, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 79991, 2002-Ohio-6312; Parma
v. Reschke, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 58015, 1991 Ohio App. LEXIS 644 (Feb. 14, 1991);
Geraci v. Maddalena, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 47964 (Oct. 25, 1984).
{¶5} Accordingly, we grant Judge Calabrese’s motion for summary judgment.
Costs to Jackson. The court directs the clerk of courts to serve all parties with notice of
this judgment and its date of entry upon the journal as required by Civ.R. 58(B).
{¶6} Writ denied.
MARY EILEEN KILBANE, JUDGE
EILEEN A. GALLAGHER, J., and KATHLEEN ANN KEOUGH, P.J., CONCUR
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2014 Ohio 3827, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-jackson-v-calabrese-ohioctapp-2014.