Title: State ex rel. Call v. Fragale

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Cite as State ex rel. Call v. Fragale, 104 Ohio St.3d 276, 2004-Ohio-6589.] 
 
 
THE STATE EX REL. CALL, APPELLANT, v.  FRAGALE, JUDGE, APPELLEE. 
[Cite as State ex rel. Call v. Fragale, 104 Ohio St.3d 276, 2004-Ohio-6589.] 
Mandamus — Public records — Copies of public records need not be provided 
free of charge — Custodian may require prepayment of postage – R.C. 
149.43(B)(1) and (3), applied. 
(No. 2004-1083 — Submitted November 16, 2004 — Decided December 15, 
2004.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Marion County, No. 9-04-19. 
____________________ 
 
Per Curiam. 
{¶1} 
Appellant, Jonathan A. Call, was convicted of aggravated arson 
and sentenced to seven years in prison.  On appeal, the court of appeals affirmed.  
State v. Call, Marion App. No. 9-03-21, 2004-Ohio-288, 2004 WL 112636, 
appeal not accepted for review and petition for transcripts at state’s expense for 
appeal denied, 102 Ohio St.3d 1471, 2004-Ohio-2830, 809 N.E.2d 1158. 
{¶2} 
In April 2004, Call filed a petition in the Court of Appeals for 
Marion County for a writ of mandamus to compel his trial-court judge, Marion 
County Court of Common Pleas Judge Richard M. Rogers, to provide him access 
to an “unmolested/unaltered certified copy of the original audiotapes” of his 
criminal trial, “free of costs.”  Call claimed entitlement to the requested records 
under the Public Records Act, R.C. 149.43.  Judge Rogers had denied Call’s 
motion for audiotapes because the court had already provided a free copy of the 
transcripts to Call. 
{¶3} 
In May 2004, appellee, Judge Robert D. Fragale, who had been 
appointed to fill Judge Rogers’s unexpired term, filed an answer and moved for 
judgment on the pleadings.  Judge Fragale specified that there were 16 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
microcassette tapes of prior proceedings involving Call and that they would be 
provided to him for $20, the cost for blank tapes to make the copies.  In June 
2004, the court of appeals granted Judge Fragale’s motion and dismissed Call’s 
petition. 
{¶4} 
This cause is now before the court upon Call’s appeal as of right. 
{¶5} 
For the following reasons, Call’s appeal is meritless. 
{¶6} 
R.C. 149.43 does not require a public-records custodian to provide 
copies of records free of charge; instead, the Public Records Act requires only that 
copies of public records be made available at cost.  R.C. 149.43(B)(1); State ex 
rel. Edwards v. Cleveland Police Dept. (1996), 116 Ohio App.3d 168, 169, 687 
N.E.2d 315; State ex rel. Mayrides v. Whitehall (1990), 62 Ohio App.3d 225, 227, 
575 N.E.2d 224.  Judge Fragale did so by offering to make copies at the $20 cost 
for blank tapes. 
{¶7} 
Moreover, since Call evidently requested that the copies be mailed 
to him, the common pleas court could properly require him to pay the cost of 
postage and mailing supplies in advance.  See R.C. 149.43(B)(3) (“Upon a request 
made in accordance with division [B][1] of this section, a public office or person 
responsible for public records shall transmit a copy of a public record to any 
person by United States mail within a reasonable period of time after receiving 
the request for the copy.  The public office or person responsible for the public 
record may require the person making the request to pay in advance the cost of 
postage and other supplies used in the mailing”).  (Emphasis added.) 
{¶8} 
Moreover, R.C. 149.43(B) does not require that public-records 
custodians provide certified copies of public records at cost.  A common pleas 
court clerk can charge up to $1 per page for certified copies of “pleadings, 
process, record, or files.”  R.C. 2303.20(Z). 
{¶9} 
Finally, “[o]nly one copy of a transcript of a criminal trial need be 
provided to an indigent criminal defendant.”  State ex rel. Call v. Zimmers (1999), 
January Term, 2004 
3 
85 Ohio St.3d 367, 368, 708 N.E.2d 711.  Judge Rogers previously noted that Call 
had already been provided a free copy of the official transcripts when he 
requested the audiotapes. 
{¶10} Based on the foregoing, the court of appeals did not err in 
dismissing Call’s petition for a writ of mandamus.  Accordingly, we affirm the 
judgment of the court of appeals. 
Judgment affirmed. 
 
MOYER, C.J., RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’CONNOR 
and O’DONNELL, JJ., concur. 
 
PFEIFER, J., concurs in judgment only. 
___________________________ 
 
Jonathan A. Call, pro se. 
 
Jim Slagle, Marion County Prosecuting Attorney, and Lawrence H. 
Babich, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. 
_____________________________