[Cite as State ex rel. Gibson v. Heath, 2016-Ohio-1449.]
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR STARK COUNTY, OHIO
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
STATE OF OHIO, EX REL. :
REGINALD GIBSON :
:
Relator : NUNC PRO TUNC
:
-vs- :
: JUDGMENT ENTRY
HONORABLE TARYN HEATH :
STARK COUNTY COURT OF :
COMMON PLEAS :
:
Respondent : CASE NO. 2015CA00084
The Opinion previously issued in this case contained a clerical error on the cover
page and judgment entry. The respondent’s name was incorrectly spelled.
_______________________________
Hon. Sheila G. Farmer
_______________________________
Hon. W. Scott Gwin
_______________________________
Hon. Patricia A. Delaney
[Cite as State ex rel. Gibson v. Heath, 2016-Ohio-1449.]
COURT OF APPEALS
STARK COUNTY, OHIO
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
STATE OF OHIO, EX REL. : JUDGES:
REGINALD GIBSON : Hon. Sheila G. Farmer, P.J.
: Hon. W. Scott Gwin, J.
Relator : Hon. Patricia A. Delaney, J.
:
-vs- :
:
HONORABLE TARYN HEATH : CASE NO. 2015CA00084
STARK COUNTY COURT OF :
COMMON PLEAS :
:
Respondent : OPINION
NUNC PRO TUNC
CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Writ of Mandamus
JUDGMENT: Dismissed
DATE OF JUDGMENT: April 5, 2016
APPEARANCES:
For Relator For Respondent
REGINALD GIBSON, Pro Se JOHN D. FERRERO
Inmate No. 654-525 Stark County Prosecuting Attorney
Lake Erie Correctional Institution By: RENEE M. WATSON
501 Thompson Road Assistant Prosecuting Attorney
P. O. Box 8000 110 Central Plaza South, Suite 510
Conneaut, OH 44030-8000 Canton, OH 44702-1413
Stark County, Case No. 2015CA00084 2
Farmer, P.J.
{¶1} Relator, Reginald Gibson, has filed a Petition for Writ of Mandamus against
Respondent, Judge Taryn Heath of the Stark County Court of Common Pleas. Relator
seeks an order requiring Respondent to issue findings of fact and conclusions of law in
support of the trial court’s denial of Relator’s motion for post-conviction relief. Respondent
has filed a motion to dismiss arguing Respondent has already issued the findings of fact
and conclusions of law. Further, Respondent argues Relator has or had an adequate
remedy at law by way of appeal.
{¶2} For a writ of mandamus to issue, the relator must have a clear legal right to
the relief prayed for, the respondent must be under a clear legal duty to perform the
requested act, and relator must have no plain and adequate remedy in the ordinary course
of law. State, ex rel. Berger, v. McMonagle (1983), 6 Ohio St.3d 28, 6 OBR 50, 451 N.E.2d
225.
{¶3} However, the Supreme Court has held mandamus will not issue where the
requested relief has been obtained, “Neither procedendo nor mandamus will compel the
performance of a duty that has already been performed.” State ex rel. Kreps v.
Christiansen (2000), 88 Ohio St.3d 313, 318, 725 N.E.2d 663, 668.
{¶4} If the entry [denying a motion for post-conviction relief] of the trial court
sufficiently apprises the petitioner of the reasons for the judgment and permits meaningful
appellate review, a writ of mandamus will not be issued to compel findings of fact and
conclusions of law. State ex rel. Carrion v. Harris (1988), 40 Ohio St.3d 19, 19–20, 530
N.E.2d 1330, 1330–1331.
Stark County, Case No. 2015CA00084 3
{¶5} Respondent issued a ruling on the motion for post-conviction relief on May
23, 2014. The entry contained sufficient findings of fact and conclusions of law to apprise
Relator of the reasons for denial of the motion.
{¶6} Because Respondent ruled on the motion in question with sufficient findings
of fact and conclusions of law, we find Relator has failed to demonstrate his entitlement
to the writ as Respondent has fulfilled her legal duty. For this reason, the motion to
dismiss is granted, and the instant petition is dismissed.
By Farmer, P.J.
Gwin, J. and
Delaney, J. concur.
SGF/as 210