Title: State ex rel. Hawk v. Athens Cty.

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Cite as State ex rel. Hawk v. Athens Cty., 106 Ohio St.3d 183, 2005-Ohio-4383.] 
 
 
[THE STATE EX REL.] HAWK, APPELLANT, v. ATHENS COUNTY, APPELLEE. 
[Cite as State ex rel. Hawk v. Athens Cty., 106 Ohio St.3d 183,  
2005-Ohio-4383.] 
Writ of mandamus sought to compel county to vacate relator’s sentence — 
Court of Appeals’ dismissal of petition for failure to comply with R.C. 
2969.25 affirmed. 
(No. 2005-0524 ─ Submitted July 26, 2005 ─ Decided September 7, 2005.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Athens County, No. 05CA1. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} This is an appeal from a judgment dismissing an inmate’s petition 
for a writ of mandamus. 
{¶ 2} In January 2001, appellant, Gary W. Hawk, was convicted of two 
counts of rape and sentenced to prison. 
{¶ 3} In January 2005, Hawk filed a petition for a writ of mandamus to 
compel appellee, Athens County, to vacate his sentence.  Hawk claimed that his 
sentence violated the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy.  Hawk’s 
petition did not include an affidavit containing a description of each civil action or 
appeal of a civil action he had filed in the previous five years in any state or 
federal court, as required by R.C. 2969.25(A).  Also, although Hawk claimed to 
be indigent, he did not include in his affidavit the statements required by R.C. 
2969.25(C)(1), setting forth the balance in his inmate account for each of the 
preceding six months, as certified by his prison cashier, and the value of all other 
items of value owned by the inmate. 
{¶ 4} On March 2, 2005, the court of appeals dismissed the petition for 
failure to comply with R.C. 2969.25. 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
{¶ 5} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.  “ ‘The 
requirements of R.C. 2969.25 are mandatory, and failure to comply with them 
subjects an inmate’s action to dismissal.’ ”  State ex rel. Norris v. Giavasis, 100 
Ohio St.3d 371, 2003-Ohio-6609, 800 N.E.2d 365, ¶ 4, quoting State ex rel. White 
v. Bechtel, 99 Ohio St.3d 11, 2003-Ohio-2262, 788 N.E.2d 634, ¶ 5. 
{¶ 6} Moreover, Hawk’s double-jeopardy claim is not cognizable in 
mandamus.  State ex rel. Dix v. McAllister (1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 107, 108, 689 
N.E.2d 561; Wenzel v. Enright (1993), 68 Ohio St.3d 63, 66, 623 N.E.2d 69. 
Judgment affirmed. 
 
MOYER, C.J., RESNICK, PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’CONNOR, 
O’DONNELL and LANZINGER, JJ., concur. 
__________________ 
 
Gary Hawk, pro se. 
______________________