State ex rel. Lessam v. Saffold
This text of 2017 Ohio 7485 (State ex rel. Lessam v. Saffold) 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. Lessam v. Saffold, 2017-Ohio-7485.]
Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 105828
STATE OF OHIO, EX REL. JENNIFER LESSAM
RELATOR
vs.
JUDGE SHIRLEY SAFFOLD RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT: WRIT DENIED
Writ of Procedendo Motion No. 508156 Order No. 509079
RELEASE DATE: September 6, 2017 FOR RELATOR
Jennifer Lessam Inmate No. W-096247 Northeast Reintegration Center 2675 E. 30th Street Cleveland, Ohio 44115
ATTORNEYS FOR RESPONDENT
Michael C. O’Malley Cuyahoga County Prosecutor By: James E. Moss Assistant County Prosecutor The Justice Center 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113 EILEEN T. GALLAGHER, J.:
{¶1} On May 25, 2017, the relator, Jennifer Lessam, commenced this
procedendo action against the respondent, Judge Shirley Strickland Saffold, to compel the
judge to rule on a motion for correction of jail-time credit, which Lessam filed on March
22, 2017, in the underlying case, State v. Lessam, Cuyahoga C.P. No. CR-15-599391-A.
On June 21, 2017, the respondent moved for summary judgment on the grounds of
mootness and pleading defects. Attached to the dispositive motion was a copy of a June
20, 2017 journal entry that granted Lessam’s motion in part and granted her 22 days of
jail-time credit. Lessam never filed a response. The June 20, 2017 entry establishes
that the respondent judge has proceeded to judgment on the subject motion and that this
writ action is moot.
{¶2} Relator also did not comply with R.C. 2969.25(C), which requires that an
inmate file a certified statement from the prison cashier setting forth the balance in the
inmate’s private account for each of the preceding six months. This also is sufficient
reason to deny the mandamus, deny indigency status, and assess costs against the relator.
State ex rel. Pamer v. Collier, 108 Ohio St.3d 492, 2006-Ohio-1507, 844 N.E.2d 842;
State ex rel. Hunter v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas, 88 Ohio St.3d 176,
2000-Ohio-285, 724 N.E.2d 420; and Hazel v. Knab, 130 Ohio St.3d 22,
2011-Ohio-4608, 955 N.E.2d 378 — the defect may not be cured by subsequent filings. {¶3} Accordingly, this court grants the respondent’s motion for summary
judgment and denies the application for a writ of procedendo. Relator to pay costs. This
court directs the clerk of courts to serve all parties notice of this judgment and its date of
entry upon the journal as required by Civ.R. 58(B).
{¶4} Writ denied.
EILEEN T. GALLAGHER, JUDGE
KATHLEEN ANN KEOUGH, A.J., CONCURS; MARY EILEEN KILBANE, J., CONCURS IN PART, DISSENTS IN PART, AND WOULD WAIVE COSTS.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2017 Ohio 7485, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-lessam-v-saffold-ohioctapp-2017.