State ex rel. Stuart v. Villanueva

[Cite as State ex rel. Stuart v. Villanueva, 2014-Ohio-1440.]
Court of Appeals of Ohio
EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION
No. 100758
STATE EX REL. BILLY STUART
RELATOR
vs.
JUDGE JOSE VILLANUEVA
RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT:
WRIT DENIED
Writ of Mandamus
Motion No. 471393
Order No. 472324
RELEASE DATE: March 28, 2014
FOR RELATOR
Billy Stuart, pro se
Inmate No. 601-509
P.O. Box 8000
Conneaut, OH 44030
ATTORNEYS FOR RESPONDENT
Timothy J. McGinty
Cuyahoga County Prosecutor
By: James E. Moss
Assistant Prosecuting Attorney
Justice Center - 9th Floor
1200 Ontario Street
Cleveland, OH 44113
ii
KENNETH A. ROCCO, J.:
{¶1} On December 16, 2013, the relator, Billy Stuart, commenced this mandamus
action against the respondent, Judge Jose Villanueva, to compel the judge to state the number
of jail-time credit days in a journal entry in the underlying case, State v. Stuart, Cuyahoga
C.P. No. CR-537870. On
January 13, 2014, the respondent moved for summary judgment on the grounds of
mootness. 1
Attached to the dispositive motion was a certified copy of a signed and
file-stamped January 9, 2014 journal entry granting 327 days of jail-time credit. Stuart did
not file a response to the summary judgment motion. This establishes that the relator has
received his requested relief and that the action is, therefore, moot.
{¶2} Relator also did not comply with R.C. 2969.25(C) that requires that an inmate
file a certified statement from his prison cashier setting forth the balance in his private account
for each of the preceding six months. This also is sufficient reason to deny the mandamus,
deny indigency status, and assess costs against the relator. State ex rel. Pamer v. Collier,
1
The January 13, 2014 summary judgment motion is an amended motion. Previously, the
respondent had filed a summary judgment motion several hours earlier — Motion No. 471379; the
court denies that motion as moot.
108 Ohio St.3d 492, 2006-Ohio-1507, 844 N.E.2d 842; and Hazel v. Knab, 130 Ohio St.3d 22,
2011-Ohio-4608, 955 N.E.2d 378.
{¶3} Accordingly, the court grants the respondent’s motion for summary judgment
and denies the application for a writ of mandamus. Relator to pay costs. This court directs
the clerk of court to serve all parties notice of this judgment and its date of entry upon the
journal as required by Civ.R. 58(B).
{¶4} Writ denied.
________________________________________
KENNETH A. ROCCO, JUDGE
LARRY A. JONES, SR., P.J., and
TIM McCORMACK, J., CONCUR