Case Title: State ex rel. Barb v. Cuyahoga Cty. Jury Commr.

Citation: 2010-Ohio-120

Docket Number: 20091442

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 2010-01-21T00:00:00Z

Document:
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as 
State ex rel. Barb v. Cuyahoga Cty. Jury Commr., Slip Opinion No. 2010-Ohio-120.] 
 
 
 
 
NOTICE 
This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in 
an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports.  Readers are requested 
to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 
65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typographical or 
other formal errors in the opinion, in order that corrections may be 
made before the opinion is published. 
 
SLIP OPINION NO. 2010-OHIO-120 
THE STATE EX REL. BARB, APPELLANT, v. CUYAHOGA COUNTY JURY 
COMMISSIONER, APPELLEE. 
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it 
may be cited as State ex rel. Barb v. Cuyahoga Cty. Jury Commr.,  
Slip Opinion No. 2010-Ohio-120.] 
Appeal from dismissal of a complaint for a writ of mandamus — Failure to 
comply with R.C. 149.43(B)(8) — Judgment affirmed. 
(No. 2009-1442 ─ Submitted January 13, 2010 ─ Decided January 21, 2010.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County, No. 93326, 
2009-Ohio-3301. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals denying the writ of 
mandamus sought by appellant, inmate Danny Barb, to compel appellee, the 
Cuyahoga County Jury Commissioner, to provide lists of prospective jurors and 
jurors who served in three criminal cases in which Barb was the defendant.  Barb 
is not entitled to the requested records because he did not comply with R.C. 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
 
149.43(B)(8), which requires a finding by Barb’s sentencing judge or the judge’s 
successor that the requested information is necessary to support what appears to 
be a justiciable claim.  State ex rel. Russell v. Thornton, 111 Ohio St.3d 409, 
2006-Ohio-5858, 856 N.E.2d 966, ¶ 16.  Although we acknowledge that a 
person’s status as a designee and the person’s purpose in obtaining records are not 
normally issues in public-records cases, see State ex rel. Steckman v. Jackson 
(1994), 70 Ohio St.3d 420, 427, 639 N.E.2d 83, R.C. 149.43(B)(8) provides an 
exception in which incarcerated persons and the purpose for which they seek 
records relating to a criminal investigation or prosecution are dispositive.  
Steckman is further inapposite here because Barb’s purported designee did not 
institute the mandamus action. 
Judgment affirmed. 
 
MOYER, 
C.J., 
and 
PFEIFER, 
LUNDBERG 
STRATTON, 
O’CONNOR, 
O’DONNELL, LANZINGER, and CUPP, JJ., concur. 
__________________ 
 
Danny Barb, pro se. 
 
William D. Mason, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and Charles 
E. Hannan, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. 
______________________