Opinion
CASE NO. 16 MA 0109
09-02-2016
STATE EX REL. ZOLTAN KOZIC, RELATOR, v. HONORABLE MAUREEN SWEENEY, RESPONDENT.
APPEARANCES: For Relator Zoltan Kozic, Pro-se Lake Erie Correctional Institution 501 Thompson Road P.O. Box 8000 Conneaut, Ohio 44030 For Respondent Paul Gains Prosecutor Ralph M. Rivera Assistant Prosecutor 21 W. Boardman St., 6th Floor Youngstown, Ohio 44503
OPINION AND JUDGMENT ENTRY CHARACTER OF PROCEEDINGS: Petition for Writ of Mandamus JUDGMENT: Dismissed APPEARANCES:
For Relator Zoltan Kozic, Pro-se
Lake Erie Correctional Institution
501 Thompson Road
P.O. Box 8000
Conneaut, Ohio 44030 For Respondent Paul Gains
Prosecutor
Ralph M. Rivera
Assistant Prosecutor
21 W. Boardman St., 6th Floor
Youngstown, Ohio 44503 JUDGES: Hon. Gene Donofrio
Hon. Mary DeGenaro
Hon. Carol Ann Robb PER CURIAM.
{¶1} Relator Zoltan Kozic has filed a pro se petition for a writ of mandamus asking this Court to compel Respondent Judge Maureen A. Sweeney of the Mahoning County Common Pleas Court, to rule on his January 11, 2016 postconviction relief petition. Counsel for Respondent has filed a motion to dismiss indicating that Respondent has already ruled upon the petition.
{¶2} A writ of mandamus is an extraordinary remedy which should be exercised by this court with caution and issued only when the right is clear. State ex rel. Brown v. Ashtabula Cty. Bd. of Elections, 142 Ohio St. 3d 370, 2014-Ohio-4022, 31 N.E.3d 596, ¶ 11. Entitlement to a writ of mandamus requires the relator to demonstrate: (1) they have a clear legal right to the relief, (2) the respondent has a clear legal duty to provide that relief, and (3) they have no adequate remedy at law. State ex rel. Taxpayers for Westerville Schools v. Franklin Cty. Bd. of Elections, 133 Ohio St.3d 153, 2012-Ohio-4267, 976 N.E.2d 890, ¶ 12.
{¶3} As counsel for Respondent points out in their motion to dismiss, Respondent ruled on Relator's motion during the pendency of this matter on August 10, 2016. Respondent has attached as an exhibit to the motion to dismiss a copy of the trial court's August 10, 2016 judgment entry in which it dismissed Relator's January 11, 2016 petition.
{¶4} Since the trial court has ruled on the petition, Relator's petition for a writ of mandamus before this court is moot. "Neither procedendo nor mandamus will compel the performance of a duty that has already been performed." Martin v. Judges of the Lucas Cty. Court of Common Pleas, 50 Ohio St.3d 71, 72, 552 N.E.2d 906 (1990). As such, Relator's petition for writ of mandamus is hereby dismissed as moot.
{¶5} No costs assessed. Donofrio, P.J. concurs. DeGenaro, J. concurs. Robb, J. concurs.