From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State ex rel. Davis v. Janas

STATE OF OHIO COUNTY OF LORAIN IN THE COURT OF APPEALS NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
Mar 31, 2021
2021 Ohio 1081 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021)

Opinion

C.A. No. 19CA011500

03-31-2021

STATE OF OHIO EX REL. IAN DAVIS Relator v. JUDGE THOMAS W. JANAS Respondent

APPEARANCES: JOANNA SANCHEZ, Assistant State Public Defender, for Relator. J.D. TOMLINSON, Prosecuting Attorney, and CARA M. FINNEGAN, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for Respondent.


ORIGINAL ACTION IN MANDAMUS

{¶1} Ian Davis petitioned this Court for a writ of mandamus to compel Respondent, Judge Thomas Janas, to vacate a nunc pro tunc entry filed on September 9, 1999, in Lorain County Common Pleas case number 93CR043666. This Court granted Judge Janas's motion to dismiss. Mr. Davis appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court, which reversed and remanded to this Court for further proceedings.

For the sake of consistency, the opinion refers to Judge Janas, but it applies to Judge Janas's successor, Judge Raymond J. Ewers. --------

{¶2} After remand, this Court ordered Judge Janas to file an answer to the complaint, but no answer was filed. Mr. Davis, now represented by the Ohio Public Defender's Office, moved for default judgment. Judge Janas did not respond to the motion. Upon review of the motion, and the Supreme Court's decision, this Court must grant the writ of mandamus and order Judge Janas to vacate the September 9, 1999 nunc pro tunc entry.

{¶3} This Court reviewed Mr. Davis's complaint and determined that, because he had an adequate remedy at law, his petition should be dismissed. The Ohio Supreme Court, however, concluded that his complaint "states a meritorious claim that the trial court patently and unambiguously lacked jurisdiction to change his sentence after his sentence had been affirmed on appeal." State ex rel. Davis v. Janas, 160 Ohio St.3d 187, 2020-Ohio-1462, ¶ 15. According to the Supreme Court, if the trial court patently and unambiguously lacked jurisdiction to act, the availability of an adequate remedy at law is irrelevant. Id. at ¶ 10.

{¶4} The Supreme Court concluded that Mr. Davis's complaint stated a meritorious claim for relief. Id. at ¶ 15. Accordingly, the writ is granted and Judge Janas is ordered to vacate the September 9, 1999 nunc pro tunc entry and reinstate the original sentence of life with parole eligibility after 20 years.

{¶5} Costs are taxed to Respondent. The clerk of courts is hereby directed to serve upon all parties not in default notice of this judgment and its date of entry upon the journal. See Civ.R. 58.

/s/_________

THOMAS A. TEODOSIO

FOR THE COURT CALLAHAN, J.
SUTTON, J.
CONCUR.

APPEARANCES:

JOANNA SANCHEZ, Assistant State Public Defender, for Relator. J.D. TOMLINSON, Prosecuting Attorney, and CARA M. FINNEGAN, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for Respondent.


Summaries of

State ex rel. Davis v. Janas

STATE OF OHIO COUNTY OF LORAIN IN THE COURT OF APPEALS NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
Mar 31, 2021
2021 Ohio 1081 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021)
Case details for

State ex rel. Davis v. Janas

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF OHIO EX REL. IAN DAVIS Relator v. JUDGE THOMAS W. JANAS Respondent

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

Date published: Mar 31, 2021

Citations

2021 Ohio 1081 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021)