Case Title: State ex rel. Stovall v. Jones

Citation: 2001-Ohio-80

Docket Number: 20002008

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 2001-05-16T00:00:00Z

Document:
[Cite as State ex rel. Stovall v. Jones, 91 Ohio St.3d 403, 2001-Ohio-80.] 
 
 
 
THE STATE EX REL. STOVALL, APPELLANT, v. JONES, JUDGE, APPELLEE. 
[Cite as State ex rel. Stovall v. Jones (2001), 91 Ohio St.3d 403.] 
Mandamus sought to compel common pleas court judge to vacate relator’s 1994 
criminal conviction and sentence — Court of appeals’ denial of writ 
affirmed. 
(No. 00-2008 — Submitted March 13, 2001 — Decided May 16, 2001.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County, No. 78366. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam.  In July 2000, appellant, A.J. Stovall, filed a complaint in the 
Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County for a writ of mandamus to compel 
appellee, Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Judge Peggy Foley Jones, to 
vacate Stovall’s 1994 criminal conviction and sentence, which she allegedly used 
to enhance Stovall’s 1997 criminal conviction and sentence.  Stovall claimed that 
Judge Jones patently and unambiguously lacked jurisdiction to try and convict 
him in the 1994 case without a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary guilty plea, 
and without a signed jury waiver pursuant to R.C. 2945.05.  Judge Jones filed a 
motion for summary judgment.  In October 2000, the court of appeals denied the 
writ. 
 
This cause is now before the court upon an appeal as of right. 
 
Stovall asserts that the court of appeals erred in denying the writ.  For the 
following reasons, Stovall’s assertions lack merit. 
 
Stovall had adequate legal remedies, e.g., a motion to withdraw his guilty 
plea and an appeal to raise his claim that he did not knowingly, intelligently, and 
voluntarily plead guilty in 1994.  See, e.g., State ex rel. Tran v. McGrath (1997), 
78 Ohio St.3d 45, 47, 676 N.E.2d 108, 109; State ex rel. Seikbert v. Wilkinson 
(1994), 69 Ohio St.3d 489, 491, 633 N.E.2d 1128, 1130; Crim.R. 32.1. 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
 
Further, a claimed violation of the jury-trial waiver requirements of R.C. 
2945.05 may be remedied only in a direct appeal from a criminal conviction.  
Bradford v. Moore (2000), 90 Ohio St.3d 75, 734 N.E.2d 828, 829; State v. Pless 
(1996), 74 Ohio St.3d 333, 658 N.E.2d 766, paragraph two of the syllabus. 
 
Based on the foregoing, we affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.1 
Judgment affirmed. 
 
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and 
LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. 
__________________ 
 
A.J. Stovall, pro se. 
 
William Mason, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and Renee L. 
Snow, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. 
__________________ 
                                                          
 
1. The court of appeals reasoned that denial was warranted because 
Stovall was using mandamus to effect his release from prison, and 
habeas corpus was thus the appropriate remedy.  See State ex rel. 
Carter v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth. (2000), 89 Ohio St.3d 496, 733 
N.E.2d 609.  It is unclear, however, from the face of the petition if 
Stovall in fact requested his release from prison.  Instead, it 
appears that he sought vacation of only his 1994 conviction and 
not his 1997 conviction.  Nevertheless, even if the court’s 
rationale was incorrect, its judgment denying the writ was 
appropriate.  See State ex rel. Fattlar v. Boyle (1998), 83 Ohio 
St.3d 123, 125, 698 N.E.2d 987, 989 (“a reviewing court is not 
authorized to reverse a correct judgment merely because erroneous 
reasons were assigned as a basis thereof”). 
 
___________________ 
 
 
A.J. Stovall, pro se. 
 
 
January Term, 2001 
3 
                                                                                                                                                              
 
 
William Mason, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and 
Renee L. Snow, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. 
____________________