State ex rel. Mitchell v. Pittman , 2024 Ohio 3246 ( 2024 )


Menu:
  • [Cite as State ex rel. Mitchell v. Pittman, 
    2024-Ohio-3246
    .]
    IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO
    ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
    PORTAGE COUNTY
    STATE OF OHIO ex rel.                                    CASE NO. 2024-P-0040
    JAMES E. MITCHELL,
    Relator,                               Original Action for Writ of Procedendo
    - vs -
    PORTAGE COUNTY COMMON PLEAS
    COURT JUDGE LAURIE J. PITTMAN,
    Respondent.
    PER CURIAM
    OPINION
    Decided: August 26, 2024
    Judgment: Dismissed
    James E. Mitchell, pro se, PID# A293-032, Marion Correctional Institution, 940 Marion-
    Williamsport Road, P.O. Box 57, Marion, OH 43302 (Relator).
    Victor V. Vigluicci, Portage County Prosecutor, and Theresa M. Scahill, Assistant
    Prosecutor, 241 South Chestnut Street, Ravenna, OH 44266 (For Respondent).
    PER CURIAM.
    {¶1}      This matter is before this Court upon motion to dismiss of respondent,
    Portage County Common Pleas Court Judge Laurie J. Pittman, filed July 25, 2024.
    {¶2}      On October 17, 2023, relator James E. Mitchell, filed a Motion for a Final
    Appealable Order with the Portage County Court of Common Pleas in Case No. 1993 CR
    0294. On December 8, 2023, relator filed a Motion to Dismiss Indictment in the same
    case. Relator then filed a Petition for a Writ of Procedendo with this Court on June 25,
    2024, after seven months had passed and there had been no ruling on his motions. On
    July 5, 2024, this Court issued an alternative writ. On July 18, 2024, Judge Pittman
    entered a judgment on both motions. Judge Pittman now asks this Court to dismiss this
    action.
    {¶3}   As grounds for dismissal, Juge Pittman argues that the motions were ruled
    upon, and the issue is now moot. “Neither procedendo nor mandamus will compel the
    performance of a duty that has already been performed.” State ex rel. Grove v. Nadel, 
    84 Ohio St.3d 252
    , 305 (1998).
    {¶4}   Because the duty relator sought has already been performed, respondent
    cannot be compelled. 
    Id.
     Relator’s request is rendered moot. Accordingly, respondent’s
    motion is granted and relator’s complaint for writ of procedendo is dismissed.
    MATT LYNCH, J., JOHN J. EKLUND, J., ROBERT J. PATTON, J., concur.
    2
    Case No. 2024-P-0040
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 2024-P-0040

Citation Numbers: 2024 Ohio 3246

Judges: Patton

Filed Date: 8/26/2024

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 8/29/2024