DocketNumber: No. 82392.
Judges: Judge Anne L. Kilbane:
Filed Date: 4/3/2003
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 4/18/2021
{¶ 2} In order for this court to issue a writ of mandamus, Robinson must establish that: 1) he possesses a clear legal right to the relief prayed; 2) he possesses no plain and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law;1 and 3) the prosecutor possesses a clear legal duty to perform the requested act. Moreover, mandamus is an extraordinary remedy which is to be exercised with caution and only when the right is clear, and it should not be issued in doubtful cases.2
{¶ 3} A prosecuting attorney will not be compelled to investigate a complaint except when the failure to prosecute constitutes an abuse of discretion. Therefore, any decision to prosecute is discretionary, and generally not subject to judicial review.3 Furthermore, an abuse of discretion connotes a decision that is unreasonable, arbitrary or unconscionable.4
{¶ 4} After reviewing the petition, we find that Robinson did not demonstrate that the prosecutor's decision constituted an abuse of discretion. Accordingly, he failed to establish that the prosecutor's office has a legal duty to investigate the complaint.
{¶ 5} We further find that he failed to comply with R.C.
{¶ 6} We grant the motion to dismiss. Robinson to bear costs. It is further ordered that the clerk shall serve upon all parties notice of this judgment and date of entry pursuant to Civ.R. 58(B).
Writ dismissed.
MICHAEL J. CORRIGAN, J., AND KENNETH A. ROCCO, A.J., CONCUR.