Case Title: State ex rel. Elkins v. Fais

Citation: 2015-Ohio-2873

Docket Number: 2014-1663

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 2015-07-21T00:00:00Z

Document:
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as 
State ex rel Elkins v. Fais, Slip Opinion No. 2015-Ohio-2873.] 
 
 
 
 
 
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. 2015-OHIO-2873 
THE STATE EX REL. ELKINS, APPELLANT, v. FAIS, JUDGE, APPELLEE. 
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it 
may be cited as State ex rel Elkins v. Fais, Slip Opinion No. 2015-Ohio-2873.] 
Procedendo—An available, though untaken, appeal is an adequate remedy at law 
that precludes an action in procedendo—Writ denied. 
(No. 2014-1663—Submitted April 14, 2015—Decided July 21, 2015.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 13AP-870,  
2014-Ohio-3886. 
_____________________ 
 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} We affirm the Tenth District Court of Appeals’ judgment dismissing 
a petition for a writ of procedendo to compel respondent-appellee, Judge David 
Fais, to hold a resentencing hearing for relator-appellant, David Elkins.  Because 
Elkins had an adequate remedy at law, he is not entitled to a writ of procedendo. 
{¶ 2} Elkins is an inmate who was convicted of robbery, aggravated 
robbery, felonious assault, possession of drugs, possession of criminal tools, 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
 
2
breaking and entering, and failure to comply with an order of a police officer, 
totaling 20 counts in all. 
{¶ 3} Judge Fais first sentenced Elkins in August 2001, imposing a 36-
year prison term.  Elkins appealed the sentence to the Tenth District Court of 
Appeals.  On June 11, 2002, the court of appeals reversed and remanded for 
resentencing.  State v. Elkins, 148 Ohio App.3d 370, 2002-Ohio-2914, 773 N.E.2d 
593 (10th Dist.).  In April 2003, Judge Fais again sentenced Elkins to 36 years. 
{¶ 4} Elkins appealed the sentence again, and the court of appeals once 
again remanded for resentencing.  State v. Elkins, 156 Ohio App.3d 281, 2004-
Ohio-842, 805 N.E.2d 203 (10th Dist.).  Judge Fais again resentenced Elkins. 
{¶ 5} Elkins appealed a third time, and the court of appeals again 
remanded for resentencing.  State v. Elkins, 10th Dist. Franklin No. 05AP-480 
(Mar. 9, 2006).  In June 2006, Judge Fais held a resentencing hearing and issued a 
judgment entry sentencing Elkins for a fourth time.  Elkins apparently did not 
appeal this sentence. 
{¶ 6} Elkins filed this action in procedendo, requesting a writ ordering 
Judge Fais to hold a sentencing hearing in compliance with the court of appeals’ 
June 11, 2002 judgment.  Judge Fais filed a motion for summary judgment, 
arguing that the June 2006 sentencing addressed all of Elkins’s sentencing issues.  
The court of appeals granted Judge Fais’s motion for summary judgment and 
dismissed the case, finding that Elkins had an adequate remedy in the ordinary 
course of the law by way of appeal of Judge Fais’s June 2006 judgment entry.  
Elkins appealed to this court. 
{¶ 7} To be entitled to a writ of procedendo, Elkins must show a clear 
legal right to require the court to proceed, a clear legal duty on the part of the 
court to proceed, and the lack of an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the 
law.  State ex rel. Sherrills v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas, 72 Ohio 
St.3d 461, 462, 650 N.E.2d 899 (1995). 
January Term, 2015 
 
3
{¶ 8} “An appeal is an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law that 
precludes an action for * * * procedendo.”  State ex rel. Ward v. Reed, 141 Ohio 
St.3d 50, 2014-Ohio-4512, 21 N.E.3d 303, ¶ 12, citing State ex rel. Crabtree v. 
Franklin Cty. Bd. of Health, 77 Ohio St.3d 247, 250, 673 N.E.2d 1281 (1997), 
and State ex rel. Sevayega v. McMonagle, 122 Ohio St.3d 54, 2009-Ohio-2367, 
907 N.E.2d 1180, ¶ 1. 
{¶ 9} Judge Fais’s June 2006 judgment entry sentencing Elkins to prison 
was an appealable order.  As the court of appeals held, Elkins had an adequate 
remedy in the ordinary course of the law by way of appeal of that order.  The fact 
that Elkins did not appeal the June 2006 entry is irrelevant, as Elkins had that 
remedy available to him.  Therefore, he is not entitled to a writ of procedendo, 
and we affirm the judgment of the court of appeals. 
Judgment affirmed. 
O’CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, O’DONNELL, LANZINGER, KENNEDY, and 
O’NEILL, JJ., concur. 
FRENCH, J., not participating. 
_____________________ 
 
David Elkins, pro se. 
 
Ronald O’Brien, Franklin County Prosecuting Attorney, and Jeffrey C. 
Rogers, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. 
_____________________