Summary
In State ex rel. Bowling v. Court of Common Pleas of Hamilton County (1970), 24 Ohio St.2d 158, 265 N.E.2d 296, the Supreme Court of Ohio denied a similar mandamus action filed to enforce the provisions of R.C. 2941.401 stating that the petitioner had an adequate remedy at law by moving the trial court to dismiss the indictment for the statutory violation.
Summary of this case from State v. LathamOpinion
No. 70-646
Decided December 23, 1970.
Criminal law — Mandamus to compel state to dismiss indictment — R.C. 2941.401 — Writ denied — Adequate legal remedy available.
IN MANDAMUS.
ON MOTION to dismiss.
Mr. Elbert Bowling, in propria persona. Mr. Melvin G. Rueger, prosecuting attorney, and Mr. Leonard Kirschner, for respondent.
This is an action in mandamus originating in this court. Relator, a prisoner, seeks to compel the state to dismiss an indictment pending against him on the ground that the case was not tried within 180 days after his demand for trial under R.C. 2941.401, effective November 8, 1969.
The relator has a clear and adequate remedy at law. He has been indicted and is represented by counsel. He can make a motion in the trial court for dismissal of the charge for denial of a speedy trial, under R.C. 2941.401, or on any other grounds he desires.
Mandamus does not lie where there is an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law.
The motion to dismiss is sustained and the writ is denied.
Writ denied.
O'NEILL, C.J., SCHNEIDER, HERBERT, DUNCAN, CORRIGAN, STERN and LEACH, JJ., concur.