[Cite as Arnoff v. State , 2021-Ohio-883.]

STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF LORAIN )

BRUCE ARNOFF Appellant

v. STATE OF OHIO Appellee C.A. No. 20CA011681

ORIGINAL ACTION

Dated: March 22, 2021

PER CURIAM. {¶1} Bruce Arnoff has filed a documen t captioned “Writ of Certiorari ” with the clerk

for the Ninth District Court of Appeals. In his complaint, he alleges that he has filed this “original

Motion to correct the Manifest In justice and Abuse of Discretio n imposed by the Lorain County Courts.” For the following r easons, we dismiss the petition su a sponte. {¶2} Sua sponte dismissal of a case, without notice, is appropriate only if the petition is frivolous or the claimant obviously cannot prevail on the fa cts alleged in the complaint. See,

e.g. , State ex rel. Duran v. Kelsey , 106 Ohio St.3d 58, 2005-Ohio-3674, ¶ 7. Mr. Arnoff cannot prevail on the facts alleged in his petition because he has not asserted a claim for a writ over which this Court has jurisdiction. {¶3} The Ohio Constitution vests the courts of appeals with original jurisdiction and appellate jurisdiction. The Constitution specifically limits t he appellate courts’ original jurisdiction to specifi c enumerated writs. Appellate jurisdict ion, on the other hand, is limited as provided by law.C.A. No. 20CA011681 Page 2 of 3 {¶4} The Ohio Constitution vests the courts of appeals with original jurisdiction over five writs: “(a) Quo warranto; ( b) Mandamus; (c) Habeas corpus ; (d) Prohibition; [and] (e) Procedendo.” Ohio Const., Art. IV, Section 3(B)(1)(a)-(e). Mr . Arnoff has a ttempted to invoke this Court’s jurisdiction to cons ider a Writ of Certiorari. Th e Ohio Constitution has not granted jurisdiction to the Ohio courts o f appeals to consider Writs of Certiorari. Because this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider thi s writ, this Court must dismi ss this action. {¶5} The Ohio Constitution also vests the courts of appeals with app ellate jurisdiction. That jurisdiction is provided by law. In the body of his petit ion, Mr. Arnoff referred to this Court’s authority to review trial court judgments. For example , he cited to Section 3(B)(2) of Article IV, Ohio Constitution; t his provision states that appel late courts have jurisdiction to review, modify, or reverse a “final order.” An appellate court ’s authority to review a trial court judgment is invoked by filing a notice of appeal, a step Mr. Ar noff did not take in this case. Mr. Arnoff did not comply with any requirements to invoke this Cour t’s appellate jur isdiction and, therefore, this Court cannot c onsider his arguments related to the validity of his guilty plea. {¶6} Mr. Arnoff attempted to invoke thi s Court’s original jurisdicti on by filing a petition for Writ of Certiorari. This Court lacks jurisdiction to consider this writ, so this case

must be dismissed. {¶7} This case is dismissed. Costs are taxed to Mr. Arnoff.C.A. No. 20CA011681 Page 3 of 3 {¶8} The clerk of courts is hereby directed to serve upon all partie s not in default notice of this judgment and its da te of entry upon the journal. See Civ.R. 58.

LYNNE S. CALL AHAN FOR THE COURT

HENSAL, J. TEODOSIO, J. CONCUR.

APPEARANCES: BRUCE ARNOFF, Pro se, Petitioner.