Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

THE STATE, EX REL. SMITH, APPELLANT, v. MCGETTRICK, JUDGE, ET AL., APPELLEES.

Mandamus to compel court to proceed on postconviction relief petition — Writ denied, when — Delay in acting upon petition not unreasonable, when.

Per Curiam.

R.C. 2953.21 through 2953.23 provide no exact timetable for determinations or hearings on petitions seeking postconviction relief pursuant to its provisions. Considering the times for pleading allowed by the statutes, a period of approximately two months between the filing of the petition in the trial court and the filing of this mandamus action is not a sufficient length of time to require the extraordinary remedy of mandamus. See State, ex rel. Lowe, v. Common Pleas Court (1977), 49 Ohio St.2d 168 [3 O.O.3d 215].

Accordingly, the judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

CELEBREZZE, C.J., W. BROWN, SWEENEY, LOCHER, HOLMES, C. BROWN and J.P. CELEBREZZE, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

STATE, EX REL. SMITH, v. MCGETTRICK
(Jul 3, 1984)