[Cite as State ex rel. Elliott v. Haas, 2011-Ohio-1037.]

COURT OF APPEALS 

STARK COUNTY, OHIO 

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT 

STATE EX REL. BRADLEY ELLIOTT 

 Relator 

-vsHONORABLE JOHN G. HAAS 

 Respondent 

JUDGES: 

: Hon. W. Scott Gwin, P.J. 

: Hon. Julie A. Edwards, J. 

: Hon. Patricia A. Delaney, J. 

: 

: 

: Case No. 2010-CA-00281 

: 

: 

: O P I N I O N

CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Writ of Mandamus 

JUDGMENT: Dismissed 

DATE OF JUDGMENT ENTRY: March 7, 2011 

APPEARANCES: 

For: Relator For: Respondent 

BRADLEY ELLIOTT PRO SE KATHLEEN O. TATARSKY 

BECI Assistant Prosecuting Attorney 

Box 540 Appellate Section 

St. Clairsville, OH 43950 Stark County Prosecutor’s Office 

 110 Central Plaza South, Ste. 510 

 Canton, OH 44702-1413 
[Cite as State ex rel. Elliott v. Haas, 2011-Ohio-1037.]

Gwin, P.J. 

{¶1} Relator, Bradley Elliott, has filed a Petition for Writ of Mandamus 

challenging the trial court’s imposition of court costs without having considered Relator’s 

ability to pay. Respondent has also filed an Answer as well as a motion to dismiss or 

motion for summary judgment. 

{¶2} For a writ of mandamus to issue, the relator must have a clear legal right 

to the relief prayed for, the respondent must be under a clear legal duty to perform the 

requested act, and relator must have no plain and adequate remedy in the ordinary 

course of law. State, ex rel. Berger, v. McMonagle (1983), 6 Ohio St.3d 28, 6 OBR 50, 

451 N.E.2d 225. 

{¶3} We have previously held, the appropriate forum for challenging court costs 

is by way of appeal from the sentencing entry; therefore, an adequate remedy at law 

exists for making such a challenge. See State of Ohio ex rel. Biros v. Logan, 2003 WL 

22326666, *2 (Ohio App. 11 Dist.) ( [T]he propriety of a decision to impose court costs 

on a convicted defendant can only be contested in a direct appeal from the sentencing 

judgment.). See Wuescher v. Whitney 2008 WL 142575, 1 (Ohio App. 5 Dist.) and State 

ex rel. Bachman v. Heath, 2010 WL 320478, 2 (Ohio App. 5 Dist.). 

{¶4} Other courts have similarly held, “[A defendant’s] legal remedy to 

challenge the court's imposition of court costs [is] by direct appeal of his sentencing 

entry. Threatt, supra. See, also, State ex rel. Biros v. Logan, Trumbull App. No.2003-T0016, at ¶ 10 (finding that res judicata bars relator from collaterally attacking an order 

imposing court costs in a mandamus action). State v. Russell, 2011 WL 334184, 3 

(Ohio App. 2 Dist.). 
Stark County, Case No. 2010-CA-00281 3 

{¶5} Because Relator has or had an adequate remedy at law to challenge the 

imposition of court costs, a writ of mandamus does not lie. For this reason, we grant 

Respondent’s motion to dismiss. 

{¶6} RESPONDENT’S MOTION TO DISMISS GRANTED. 

{¶7} PETITION DISMISSED. 

{¶8} COSTS TO RELATOR. 

 

{¶9} IT IS SO ORDERED. 

By Gwin, P.J., 

Edwards, J., and 

Delaney, J., concur 

 _________________________________ 

 HON. W. SCOTT GWIN 

 _________________________________ 

 HON. JULIE A. EDWARDS 

 _________________________________ 

 HON. PATRICIA A. DELANEY 

WSG:clw 0209
[Cite as State ex rel. Elliott v. Haas, 2011-Ohio-1037.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR STARK COUNTY, OHIO 

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT 

STATE EX REL. BRADLEY ELLIOTT : 

 : 

 Relator : 

 : 

 : 

-vs- : JUDGMENT ENTRY 

 : 

HONORABLE JOHN G. HAAS : 

 : 

 : 

 Respondent : CASE NO. 2010-CA-00281 

 For the reasons stated in our accompanying Memorandum-Opinion, Respondent’s 

Motion to Dismiss is granted, and the instant cause is dismissed. Costs to Relator. 

 _________________________________ 

 HON. W. SCOTT GWIN 

 _________________________________ 

 HON. JULIE A. EDWARDS 

 _________________________________ 

 HON. PATRICIA A. DELANEY