State, ex rel. Harmon v. Bender
| Decision Date | 09 July 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. 85-1758,85-1758 |
| Citation | 25 OBR 13,494 N.E.2d 1135,25 Ohio St.3d 15 |
| Parties | , 25 O.B.R. 13, 13 Media L. Rep. 1031 The STATE, ex rel. HARMON, v. BENDER, Judge. |
| Court | Ohio Supreme Court |
Craig Harmon, pro se.
Stanley E. Flegm, Pros. Atty., and Lee A. Oldendick, Bucyrus, for respondent.
The controlling question in this case is whether videotapes of trial proceedings are public records subject to the public access provisions of R.C. 149.43(B). We have previously held that mandamus is the appropriate remedy to compel a governmental unit to provide public access to public records under R.C. 149.43. See State, ex rel. Plain Dealer Publishing Co., v. Lesak (1984), 9 Ohio St.3d 1, 467 N.E.2d 821. For the following reasons we find that videotapes of trial proceedings are public records, and we issue a writ of mandamus directing respondent to allow relator access to the videotape of State v. Falzitto, supra. R.C. 149.43(A)(1) defined "public record" as follows:
" 'Public record' means any record that is required to be kept by any governmental unit, including, but not limited to, state, county, city, village, township, and school district units, except medical records, records pertaining to adoption, probation, and parole proceedings, records listed in division (A) of section 3107.42 of the Revised Code, trial preparation records, confidential law enforcement investigatory records, and records the release of which is prohibited by state or federal law." (140 Ohio Laws, Part I, 1791, 1792.)
We have interpreted this statutory definition of public records to include " 'a[ny] record required by law to be kept, or necessary to be kept, in the discharge of a duty imposed by law * * *.' " State v. Brooks (1971), 27 Ohio St.2d 144, 147, 271 N.E.2d 869 ; State, ex rel. Citizens' Bar Assn., v. Gagliardo (1978), 55 Ohio St.2d 70, 71, 378 N.E.2d 153 .
R.C. 149.43(B) mandated public access to public records and stated in pertinent part:
When viewed in light of R.C. 149.43 and the case law interpreting that statute, videotapes of trial proceedings fit squarely within the definition of public records. A trial court is required to make and keep a record of its proceedings for use on appeal. A trial court generally discharges this duty by recording the proceedings using either a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. Scripps Howard Broadcasting Co. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas, Juv. Div.
...570, 579. We have held that the videotapes of trial proceedings are public records under R.C. 149.43. State ex rel. Harmon v. Bender (1986), 25 Ohio St.3d 15, 25 OBR 13, 494 N.E.2d 1135; but, cf., State ex rel. Steffen v. Kraft (1993), 67 Ohio St.3d 439, 440, 619 N.E.2d 688, 689 (if R.C. 14......
-
State, ex rel. Fostoria Daily Review Co. v. Fostoria Hosp. Ass'n
...in order to redress alleged violations of R.C. 149.43. Appellant contends that our recent decision in State, ex rel. Harmon, v. Bender (1986), 25 Ohio St.3d 15, 25 OBR 13, 494 N.E.2d 1135, is controlling where it was held that mandamus was the proper mechanism for assuring disclosure of pub......
-
State, ex rel. Margolius v. Cleveland
...message that we require agencies to disclose more than just a literal representation on paper. Accord State, ex rel. Harmon, v. Bender (1986), 25 Ohio St.3d 15, 25 OBR 13, 494 N.E.2d 1135 (trial proceedings recorded on videotape constitute a public record pursuant to R.C. 149.43 separate fr......
-
State, ex rel., Fostoria Daily Review Co. v. Fostoria Hospital Association.
... ... in the ordinary course of law ... We are ... aware that in State, ex rel. Harmon, v. Bender ... (1986), 25 Ohio St.3d 15, the court again in enforcing R.C ... 149.43(B) noted its previous decisions to the effect that ... ...