Title: State ex rel. Warren v. Boggins

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[THE STATE EX REL.] WARREN, APPELLANT, v. BOGGINS, JUDGE, APPELLEE. 
[Cite as State ex rel. Warren v. Boggins (1999), 87 Ohio St.3d 264.] 
Mandamus sought to compel common pleas court judge to conduct an evidentiary 
hearing on relator’s postsentence motion to withdraw his no contest plea 
— Dismissal of action affirmed, when. 
(No. 99-1353 — Submitted October 12, 1999 — Decided December 1, 1999.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Stark County, No. 1999CA00199. 
 
In June 1999, appellant, Frank A. Warren, filed a complaint in the court of 
appeals for a writ of mandamus to compel appellee, Stark County Court of 
Common Pleas Judge John F. Boggins, to conduct an evidentiary hearing on 
Warren’s postsentence motion to withdraw his no contest plea.  The court of 
appeals dismissed the complaint. 
 
This cause is now before the court upon an appeal as of right. 
__________________ 
 
Frank A. Warren, pro se. 
 
Robert D. Horowitz, Stark County Prosecuting Attorney, and Ronald Mark 
Caldwell, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam.  We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.  A writ of 
mandamus will not be issued when there is a plain and adequate remedy in the 
ordinary course of the law.  R.C. 2731.05; State ex rel. Natl. Electrical Contractors 
Assn. v. Ohio Bur. of Emp. Serv. (1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 179, 183, 699 N.E.2d 64, 
67. 
 
As the court of appeals correctly held, Warren has an adequate remedy by 
appeal from any judgment denying his postsentence motion to withdraw his plea in 
order to raise his claim that Judge Boggins erred by not holding an evidentiary 
hearing.  See, e.g., State v. Hamed (1989), 63 Ohio App.3d 5, 577 N.E.2d 1111; 
 
2
State v. Legree (1988), 61 Ohio App.3d 568, 573 N.E.2d 687; see, also, Gause v. 
Zaleski (1999), 85 Ohio St.3d 614, 615, 710 N.E.2d 684, 685-686, in which we 
similarly affirmed the dismissal of a mandamus action because the relator had an 
adequate remedy at law by appeal to raise his claim that his sentencing court erred 
in not conducting evidentiary hearings before dismissing his postconviction relief 
petitions. 
Judgment affirmed. 
 
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and 
LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur.