Title: State ex rel. White v. Goldsberry

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

`THE STATE EX REL. WHITE, APPELLANT, v. GOLDSBERRY, JUDGE,  ET AL., 
APPELLEES. 
[Cite as State ex rel. White v. Goldsberry (1999), ___ Ohio St.3d ___.] 
Public records — Mandamus to compel common pleas court judge and 
prosecuting attorney to provide relator with records of peremptory strikes 
resulting in the exclusion of African-Americans as foremen of grand juries 
from 1960 to 1999 — Complaint dismissed, when. 
(No. 98-2285 — Submitted February 9, 1999 — Decided March 31, 1999.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Athens County, No. 98CA000038. 
 
In 1984, appellant, Michael T. White, was convicted of one count of 
aggravated burglary, two counts of aggravated robbery, one count of felonious 
assault, and accompanying firearm specifications, and was sentenced to prison.  
See State v. White (May 23, 1986), Athens App. No. 1230, unreported, 1986 WL 
6048. 
 
In September 1998, White filed a complaint in the Court of Appeals for 
Athens County for a writ of mandamus to compel appellees, Athens County 
Common Pleas Court Judge L. Alan Goldsberry and Athens County Prosecuting 
Attorney William R. Biddlestone, to, inter alia, provide him with records of 
peremptory strikes resulting in the exclusion of African-Americans as foremen of 
grand juries from 1960 to 1999; to provide him with records containing  
information indicating whether an African-American had ever been selected 
foreman of a grand jury in Athens County; to quash White’s indictment; to declare 
a violation of Section 243, Title 18, U.S.Code; and to discharge White if no 
African-American had ever been selected to be the foreman of an Athens County 
Grand Jury.  White did not file an R.C. 2969.25(A) affidavit describing each civil 
 
2
action or appeal of a civil action he had filed in the previous five years in any state 
or federal court. 
 
The court of appeals sua sponte dismissed the complaint. 
 
This cause is now before the court upon an appeal as of right. 
__________________ 
 
Michael T. White, pro se. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam.  White asserts in his sole proposition of law that the court of 
appeals erred in dismissing his mandamus action.  For the reasons that follow, 
however, White’s contentions lack merit. 
 
First, the records sought by White do not exist, and appellees have no duty 
under R.C. 149.43 to create new records by searching for and compiling 
information from existing records.  State ex rel. Kerner v. State Teachers 
Retirement Bd. (1998), 82 Ohio St.3d 273, 274, 695 N.E.2d 256, 258; State ex rel. 
Lanham v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth. (1997), 80 Ohio St.3d 425, 427, 687 N.E.2d 
283, 285. 
 
Second, appellees had no duty under R.C. 149.43 to transmit copies of the 
requested records to White in prison.  State ex rel. Iacovone v. Kaminski (1998), 
81 Ohio St.3d 189, 190, 690 N.E.2d 4, 5; State ex rel. Mayes v. Holman (1996), 76 
Ohio St.3d 147, 149, 666 N.E.2d 1132, 1134. 
 
Third, White had an adequate legal remedy to raise issues relating to the 
fairness of the grand jury selection process by motion to dismiss the indictment 
and direct appeal of his criminal conviction.  R.C. 2731.05. 
 
Fourth, to the extent that White requested his discharge from prison, habeas 
corpus, rather than mandamus, is the proper action.  State ex rel. Sampson v. 
Parrott (1998), 82 Ohio St.3d 92, 93, 694 N.E.2d 463. 
 
3
 
Finally, the court of appeals held that White failed to comply with the 
requirements of R.C. 2969.25(A) in commencing his mandamus action, and like 
the appellants in similar cases, White does not assert on appeal that R.C. 
2969.25(A) is inapplicable to mandamus actions.  See State ex rel. Zanders v. 
Ohio Parole Bd. (1998), 82 Ohio St.3d 421, 422, 696 N.E.2d 594, 594-595, and 
State ex rel. Alford v. Winters (1997), 80 Ohio St.3d 285, 286, 685 N.E.2d 1242, 
1242-1243; cf. Smith v. Walker (1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 431, 432-433, 700 N.E.2d 
592, 593.1 
 
Based on the foregoing, we affirm the judgment of the court of appeals. 
Judgment affirmed. 
 
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and 
LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. 
FOOTNOTE: 
1. 
We overrule White’s motion for default judgment.  Although appellees 
failed to file a timely merit brief, we decline to reverse the judgment of the court 
of appeals because White’s brief does not “reasonably appear[] to sustain 
reversal.”  S.Ct.Prac.R. VI(6).