State ex rel. Smith v. McGettrick

465 N.E.2d 411, 12 Ohio St. 3d 54, 12 Ohio B. 47, 1984 Ohio LEXIS 1162
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided July 3, 1984·No. No. 83-305·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

R.C. 2953.21 through 2953.23 provide no exact timetable for determinations or hearings on petitions seeking postconviction relief pursuant to its provisions. Considering the times for pleading allowed by the statutes, a period of approximately two months between the filing of the petition in the trial court and the filing of this mandamus action is not a sufficient length of time to require the extraordinary remedy of mandamus. See State, ex rel. Lowe, v. Common Pleas Court (1977), 49 Ohio St. 2d 168 [3 O.O.3d 215].

Accordingly, the judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Celebrezze, C.J., W. Brown, Sweeney, Locher, Holmes, C. Brown and J. P. Celebrezze, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

State ex rel. Smith v. McGettrick, 465 N.E.2d 411, 12 Ohio St. 3d 54, 12 Ohio B. 47, 1984 Ohio LEXIS 1162 (Ohio 1984).

465 N.E.2d 411 (State ex rel. Smith v. McGettrick) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related