Title: State ex rel. Newsome v. Hack

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State 
ex rel. Newsome v. Hack, Slip Opinion No. 2020-Ohio-4812.] 
 
 
 
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. 2020-OHIO-4812 
THE STATE EX REL. NEWSOME v. HACK ET AL. 
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it 
may be cited as State ex rel. Newsome v. Hack, Slip Opinion No.  
2020-Ohio-4812.] 
Mandamus—Sentencing transcript—Impossible acts—Prior judgment cannot be 
executed—Judgment vacated and writ denied. 
(No. 2019-0457—Submitted August 4, 2020—Decided October 13, 2020.) 
IN MANDAMUS. 
_______________ 
 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} For the following reasons, we vacate our February 5, 2020 judgment 
granting relator, Jeffrey Newsome, a writ of mandamus, and we enter judgment 
denying the writ. 
I.  Background 
{¶ 2} On March 27, 2019, Newsome filed an original action in this court, 
seeking a writ of mandamus to compel a former Marion County court reporter, 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
 
2
respondent Karla Hack, to inform him of the cost to obtain a copy of his 2009 
sentencing transcript.  On February 5, 2020, we granted the writ and ordered Hack 
and respondents Marion County Court Reporter’s Office and the current court 
reporter to tell Newsome the transcript fee.  State ex rel. Newsome v. Hack, 159 
Ohio St.3d 44, 2020-Ohio-336, 146 N.E.3d 571, ¶ 8-10. 
{¶ 3} On April 17, 2020, Newsome filed a notice informing us that 
respondents had not complied with the writ of mandamus.  We ordered Hack to 
demonstrate a verifiable factual basis as to whether our judgment had been or was 
able to be executed.  159 Ohio St.3d 1412, 2020-Ohio-3275, 147 N.E.3d 649. 
II.  Hack’s response 
{¶ 4} On June 30, 2020, Hack filed her response, to which she attached her 
own affidavit and the affidavit of Greg Boyd, bailiff to Judge Jason Warner of the 
Marion County Court of Common Pleas. 
{¶ 5} Hack avers that upon her 2012 retirement as the Marion County court 
reporter, “all remaining notes retained in my service were turned over to the custody 
of the Common Pleas Court for destruction.  Any notes from [State of Ohio v. 
Jeffrey Newsome] Case No. 08-CR-438 (if in fact there were notes) have been 
destroyed.”  Hack also states that she has “advised Mr. Newsome that [she] do[es] 
not have records relating to this case and instructed him that he would have to 
contact the Court of Common Pleas of Marion County and that if a recording of the 
proceeding was provided to [her, she] would transcribe the sentencing hearing.” 
{¶ 6} Boyd avers that as bailiff, he has “access to the electronic files which 
contain recordings of official court proceedings.”  He further avers that the county 
prosecutor asked him to produce the recording of Newsome’s 2009 sentencing 
hearing.  However, Boyd “concluded that no such recording existed,” and he 
“advised the Prosecuting Attorney that the Judgment of the [Ohio] Supreme Court 
cannot be executed.”  Boyd also states that he spoke to the former bailiff, Kevin 
January Term, 2020 
 
3
Williams, who allegedly told Boyd that in late 2017, he had been asked by 
Newsome’s family to provide the same recording but could not locate it. 
III.  Analysis 
{¶ 7} In this case, the only evidence indicating that a transcript of 
Newsome’s sentencing hearing exists is the trial court’s statement to that effect in 
a December 2017 entry.  It now appears that that statement was not correct. 
{¶ 8} Moreover, it seems that despite the fact that according to Hack, 
“[e]ach courtroom had a recording device to record the * * * proceedings,” any 
recordings of Newsome’s 2009 sentencing hearing no longer exist.  Hack also 
indicates that a transcript of the sentencing hearing cannot be recreated because she 
no longer has any notes that she may have taken in Newsome’s case.  Had this 
evidence been before us at the time of our prior judgment, we would have denied 
the writ because mandamus will not lie “to compel what would be tantamount to 
an impossible act,” State ex rel. Cincinnati Enquirer, Div. of Gannett Satellite 
Information Network, Inc. v. Cincinnati Bd. of Edn., 99 Ohio St.3d 6, 2003-Ohio-
2260, 788 N.E.2d 629, ¶ 15.  Because a transcript cannot be located and neither 
Hack nor the Marion County Court of Common Pleas have the requested recording 
or any notes from the 2009 sentencing hearing, our February 5, 2020 judgment 
cannot be executed. 
{¶ 9} Accordingly, we vacate our February 5, 2020 judgment and deny the 
writ. 
Judgment vacated 
and writ denied. 
O’CONNOR, C.J., and KENNEDY, FRENCH, FISCHER, DEWINE, DONNELLY, 
and STEWART, JJ., concur. 
_________________ 
Jeffrey Newsome, pro se. 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
 
4
Raymond A. Grogan, Jr., Marion County Prosecuting Attorney, and 
William J. Owen, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for respondents. 
_________________