State ex rel. Williams v. Sutula
This text of 2012 Ohio 5704 (State ex rel. Williams v. Sutula) 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. Williams v. Sutula, 2012-Ohio-5704.]
Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 98827
STATE OF OHIO EX REL. WILLIS F. WILLIAMS
RELATOR
vs.
HONORABLE JOHN D. SUTULA
RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT: WRIT DENIED Writ of Procedendo Motion No. 459576 Order No. 460140
RELEASE DATE: November 30, 2012 FOR RELATOR
Willis F. Williams, pro se Inmate No. 155-394 Richland Correctional Institution P.O. Box 8107 Mansfield, Ohio 44901
ATTORNEYS FOR RESPONDENT
Timothy J. McGinty Cuyahoga County Prosecutor BY: James E. Moss Assistant County Prosecutor 9th Floor Justice Center 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113
MARY J. BOYLE, J.:
{¶1} Willis F. Williams has filed a complaint for a writ of procedendo. Williams seeks
an order from this court that requires Judge John D. Sutula to render rulings with regard to a
“motion for leave to file delayed motion for new trial pursuant to Ohio Criminal Rule 33(B)”
and a “motion for leave to file supplemental authority and to supplement the record instanter” as filed in State v. Williams, Cuyahoga C.P. No. CR-048025. Judge Sutula has filed a
motion for summary judgment, which is granted.
{¶2} Williams’s request for a writ of procedendo is moot. Attached to
the motion for summary judgment is a copy of a judgment entry, as
journalized on October 17, 2012, which demonstrates that Williams’s “motion
for leave to file delayed motion for new trial pursuant to Ohio Criminal Rule 33(B)” and a
“motion for leave to file supplemental authority and to supplement the record instanter” were
denied. 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. Snider v.
Stapleton, 65 Ohio St.3d 40, 600 N.E.2d 240 (1992); State ex rel. Richard v.
Wells, 64 Ohio St.3d 76, 591 N.E.2d 1240 (1992); State ex rel. Gantt v.
Coleman, 6 Ohio St.3d 5, 450 N.E.2d 1163 (1983).
{¶3} Accordingly, we grant the motion for summary judgment. Judge
Sutula to pay costs. Costs ordered waived. The court directs the clerk of
the 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).
{¶4} Writ denied.
____________________________________ MARY J. BOYLE, JUDGE PATRICIA ANN BLACKMON, A.J., and COLLEEN CONWAY COONEY, J., CONCUR
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2012 Ohio 5704, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-williams-v-sutula-ohioctapp-2012.