State ex rel. Bowling v. Court of Common Pleas of Hamilton County, 70-646
| Decision Date | 23 December 1970 |
| Docket Number | No. 70-646,70-646 |
| Citation | 265 N.E.2d 296,53 O.O.2d 355,24 Ohio St.2d 158 |
| Parties | , 53 O.O.2d 355 The STATE ex rel. BOWLING, v. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF HAMILTON COUNTY. |
| Court | Ohio Supreme Court |
Elbert Bowling, in pro. per.
Melvin G. Rueger, Pros. Atty., and Leonard Kirschner, Cincinnati, for respondent.
This is an action in mandamus originating in this court. Relator, a prisoner, seeks to compel the state to dismiss an indictment pending against him on the ground that the case was not tried within 180 days after his demand for trial under R.C. § 2941.401, effective November 8, 1969.
The relator has a clear and adequate remedy at law. He has been indicted and is represented by counsel. He can make a motion in the trial court for dismissal of the charge for denial of a speedy trial, under R.C. § 2941.401, or on any other grounds he desires.
Mandamus does not lie where there is an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law.
The motion to dismiss is sustained and the writ is denied.
Writ denied.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Clarke v. McFaul, 2007 Ohio 1592 (Ohio App. 4/3/2007)
...for a claim that the State has not sought timely disposition of a pending criminal charge. State ex rel. Bowling v. Court of Common Pleas of Hamilton County (1970), 24 Ohio St.3d 158, 265 N.E.2d 296. {¶ 12} Accordingly, this court grants the Sheriff's motion to dismiss and dismisses Clarke'......
-
Jackson v. Wilson, 2003-0399.
...appealing from the judgment. {¶ 6} This conclusion is consistent with precedent. See State ex rel. Bowling v. Hamilton Cty. Court of Common Pleas (1970), 24 Ohio St.2d 158, 53 O.O.2d 355, 265 N.E.2d 296. In Bowling, we dismissed a prisoner's mandamus claim that was premised on an alleged vi......
-
State ex rel. Relator v. Judge David T. Matia
...to that statute, the trial court has lost jurisdiction to adjudicate his case. However, in State ex rel. Bowling v. Court of Common Pleas of Hamilton Cty., 24 Ohio St.2d 158, 265 N.E.2d 296 (1970), the Supreme Court of Ohio refused to grant an extraordinary writ to enforce R.C. 2941.401 bec......
-
Tisdale v. Eberlin, 2007 Ohio 1409 (Ohio App. 3/6/2007)
...R.C. §2941.401 because there is a clear and adequate remedy at law to resolve the matter. State ex rel. Bowling v. Court of Common Pleas of Hamilton County (1970), 24 Ohio St.2d 158, 265 N.E.2d 296. {¶7} Petitioner has failed to follow the statutory requirements for filing a petition for wr......