State ex rel. Norman v. Calabrese

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as State ex rel. Norman v. Calabrese, 2003-Ohio-6326.] COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA No. 83202 STATE OF OHIO, EX REL. JUJUAN NORMAN Relator vs. ANTHONY CALABRESE, JR. Respondent : : : : : : : : : : ORIGINAL ACTION JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION DATE OF JOURNALIZATION: NOVEMBER 26, 2003 CHARACTER OF PROCEEDINGS: WRIT OF MANDAMUS JUDGMENT: Writ Denied. Motion No. 352683 Order No. 354322 APPEARANCES: For Relator: JUJUAN NORMAN, PRO SE Inmate No. 421791 Mansfield Correctional Institution P.O. Box 788 Mansfield, Ohio 44901 For Respondent: WILLIAM D. MASON, ESQ. Cuyahoga County Prosecutor BY: KRISTEN LUSNIA, ESQ. Assistant County Prosecutor Justice Center - 9th Floor 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113 FRANK D. CELEBREZZE, JR., J.: 2 {¶1} Relator requests that this court compel respondent judge to issue findings of fact and conclusions of law with respect to the petition for postconviction relief filed by relator in State v. Norman, Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case No. CR-411588 on September 23, 2002. Respondent is no longer a judge of the court of common pleas. {¶2} Respondent has filed a motion for summary judgment attached to which is a copy of the findings of fact and conclusions of law issued by respondent s successor and received for filing by the clerk on September 4, 2003. motion. Relator has not opposed the Respondent argues that the duty of the court of common pleas has been discharged and that relief in mandamus is not appropriate. {¶3} granted. We agree. Accordingly, respondent's motion for summary judgment is Relator to pay costs. The clerk is directed to serve upon the parties notice of this judgment and its date of entry upon the journal. Civ.R. 58(B). Writ denied. FRANK D. CELEBREZZE, JR. JUDGE MICHAEL J. CORRIGAN, P.J., CONCURS JAMES J. SWEENEY, J., CONCURS KEYWORDS Mandamus; postconviction relief; findings of fact and conclusions 3 of law.

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.