State v. Friedland, Unpublished Decision (10-14-1999)

Ohio Court of Appeals

State v. Friedland, Unpublished Decision (10-14-1999)

DecidedOctober 14, 1999

DocketNo. 76750. Motion No. 10587.

StatusUnpublished

This text of State v. Friedland, Unpublished Decision (10-14-1999) (State v. Friedland, Unpublished Decision (10-14-1999)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law.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.

Bluebook

State v. Friedland, Unpublished Decision (10-14-1999), (Ohio Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS JUDGMENT: WRIT DENIED. JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION Relator, Michael Fuller, seeks a writ of mandamus in order to compel the respondent, Judge Carolyn B. Friedland, to issue findings of fact and conclusions of law with regard to petitions for postconviction relief that were filed in the underlying cases of State v. Fuller, Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case Nos. CR-276787 and CR-277973. The respondent has filed a motion for summary judgment, which we grant for the following reasons.

The underlying motions, as filed by the relator on March 30, 1999, represent successive petitions for postconviction relief. The respondent, however, possesses no clear legal duty to file findings of fact and conclusions of law with regard to successive petitions for postconviction relief. See State ex rel. White v.Goldsberry (1996), 76 Ohio St.3d 271; State ex rel. Luna v.McGimpsey (1996), 74 Ohio St.3d 485. Since the respondent possesses discretion to issue findings of fact and conclusions of law and the relator possesses an adequate remedy at law through a direct appeal, mandamus does not lie to compel the filing of findings of fact and conclusions of law. State ex rel. Jenningsv. Nurre (1995), 72 Ohio St.3d 596.

It must also be noted that the relator has failed to comply with Loc.App.R. 45(B)(1)(a), which mandates that a complaint in an original action "must be supported by an affidavit from the plaintiff or relator specifying the details of the claim". Failure to provide this court with a supporting affidavit warrants dismissal. State ex rel. Sherrills v. Court of CommonPleas (Dec. 1, 1995), Cuyahoga App. No. 69707, unreported.

Accordingly, we grant the respondent's motion for summary judgment. Costs to relator.

Writ denied.

ANN DYKE, J., CONCURS

___________________________________ JAMES M. PORTER ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE

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

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS JUDGMENT: WRIT DENIED. JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION Relator, Michael Fuller, seeks a writ of mandamus in order to compel the respondent, Judge Carolyn B. Friedland, to issue findings of fact and conclusions of law with regard to petitions for postconviction relief that were filed in the underlying cases of State v. Fuller, Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case Nos. CR-276787 and CR-277973. The respondent has filed a motion for summary judgment, which we grant for the following reasons.

The underlying motions, as filed by the relator on March 30, 1999, represent successive petitions for postconviction relief. The respondent, however, possesses no clear legal duty to file findings of fact and conclusions of law with regard to successive petitions for postconviction relief. See State ex rel. White v.Goldsberry (1996), 76 Ohio St.3d 271; State ex rel. Luna v.McGimpsey (1996), 74 Ohio St.3d 485. Since the respondent possesses discretion to issue findings of fact and conclusions of law and the relator possesses an adequate remedy at law through a direct appeal, mandamus does not lie to compel the filing of findings of fact and conclusions of law. State ex rel. Jenningsv. Nurre (1995), 72 Ohio St.3d 596.

It must also be noted that the relator has failed to comply with Loc.App.R. 45(B)(1)(a), which mandates that a complaint in an original action "must be supported by an affidavit from the plaintiff or relator specifying the details of the claim". Failure to provide this court with a supporting affidavit warrants dismissal. State ex rel. Sherrills v. Court of CommonPleas (Dec. 1, 1995), Cuyahoga App. No. 69707, unreported.

Accordingly, we grant the respondent's motion for summary judgment. Costs to relator.

Writ denied.

ANN DYKE, J., CONCURS

___________________________________ JAMES M. PORTER ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

State v. Friedland, Unpublished Decision (10-14-1999), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-friedland-unpublished-decision-10-14-1999-ohioctapp-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack