State ex rel. Peterson v. Gallagher
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as State ex rel. Peterson v. Gallagher, 2010-Ohio-2490.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 94884 STATE OF OHIO, EX REL. DAMIEN PETERSON RELATOR vs. EILEEN A. GALLAGHER, JUDGE RESPONDENT JUDGMENT: WRIT DENIED Writ of Mandamus Motion No. 433130 Order No. 434022 RELEASE DATE: June 2, 2010 2 FOR RELATOR Damien Peterson, pro se Inmate No. 503-884 Mansfield Correctional Institution P.O. Box 788 1150 North Main St. Mansfield, Ohio 44901-0788 ATTORNEYS FOR RESPONDENT William D. Mason Cuyahoga County Prosecutor By: James E. Moss Assistant County Prosecutor 8th Floor Justice Center 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113 LARRY A. JONES, J.: {¶ 1} Relator, Damien Peterson, requests that this court issue a writ of mandamus compelling respondent judge to rule on his motion for sentencing filed in State v. Peterson, Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case No. CR-471307 on November 19, 2009. Peterson also requests that this court compel respondent to issue findings of fact and conclusions of law with respect to his motion for sentencing. {¶ 2} Respondent has filed a motion for summary judgment attached to which is a copy of a journal entry issued by respondent judge and received for 3 filing by the clerk on April 5, 2010 in which respondent denied the motion for sentencing. Peterson has not opposed respondent s motion for summary judgment. Respondent argues that this action in mandamus is, therefore, moot. We agree. {¶ 3} To the extent that Peterson is requesting that this court compel respondent to issue a journal entry disposing of his motion for sentencing, this action is moot. To the extent that Peterson is requesting that this court compel respondent to issue findings of fact and conclusions of law with respect to the denial of the motion for sentencing, the complaint fails to state a claim for relief upon which relief can be granted. That is, Peterson has not provided this court with any authority requiring respondent to issue findings of fact and conclusions of law with respect to a motion for sentencing. {¶ 4} Additionally, the complaint is defective. Although Peterson attaches what purports to be a copy of his inmate account, the account is not certified by the prison cashier as required by R.C. 2969.25(C). Failure to comply with R.C. 2969.25 may result in dismissal and the denial of indigency status. See, e.g., State ex rel. Santos v. McDonnell, Cuyahoga App. No. 90659, 2008-Ohio-214. {¶ 5} Accordingly, respondent's motion for summary judgment is granted. Relator to pay costs. The clerk is directed to serve upon the 4 parties notice of this judgment and its date of entry upon the journal. Civ.R. 58(B). Writ denied. LARRY A. JONES, JUDGE SEAN C. GALLAGHER, A.J., and ANN DYKE, J., CONCUR
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
