INTRODUCTIONa prison termof five yearsfor each count to be served concurrently2Christnerdid not appeal his conviction and sentence Insteadhe filed fivemotions forjudicial release between August 2011 a ID: 881147
Download Pdf The PPT/PDF document "IN THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIORelatorStark..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIORelator,Star
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIORelator,Stark County Court of Common Pleas,13-0820ORIGINAL ACTION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUSRESPONSE AND MOTION TO DISMISSOF RESPONDENT,JOHND. FERRERO,PROSECUTING ATTORNEY,OhioSup. Ct.Reg. No. 0072906Attorney110 Central Plaza, SouthOhio 44702-1413(330) 451-7965of Record for RespondentGECE^JUN0 32013CLEFKQFCOURTALFRED CHRISTNER,pro seInmateNo. 603158Hocking Correctional FacilityNelsonville,Ohio 45764pro seS4.^^
2 .JUN 03 `^^^^r_ve.^flrRK 0^ Fa'UURI%RRlL
.JUN 03 `^^^^r_ve.^flrRK 0^ Fa'UURI%RRlL GOURT OF ®HIQ INTRODUCTIONa prison termof five yearsfor each count, to be served concurrently.2Christnerdid not appeal his conviction and sentence. Instead,he filed fivemotions forjudicial release between August 2011 and June, 2012 all of which were denied. Christner thenreleaseto the Fifth District Court of Appeals.his court costs, a motion to stay collection of court costs a "Rule 52" requ
3 est and a sixth motion'R.C. 2907.05(A)(4
est and a sixth motion'R.C. 2907.05(A)(4),felonies of the third degree.?C u'stnerallegeshe was sentenc-edto 3 years for one count of gross sexual imposition3 State v. Christner,5th Dist. App. No. 2012CA00135, 2012-Ohio-4790. On April 12, 2013, Christner filed a "Letter Motion" seeking a copy of a transcript of hisinterview with Detective Bryan Allan, a document he received in discovery. He claimed thetranscript would form the found
4 ation of his innocence on one count of t
ation of his innocence on one count of the indictment andwithdraw his plea was denied on Apri122, 2013. The judgment entry denying the motion madeFifth District, but instead, filed the instant writ of mandamus with this Court. The instant action MANDAMUS RELIEF IS PRECLUDEDfailed to satisfy two basic requirements for such extraordinary relief - that respondent has a clearFirst, Christner had an adequate remedy at law by way of dire
5 ct appeal to challenge thethis claim and
ct appeal to challenge thethis claim and have it properly reviewed.Second, Christner appears to suggest that the respondent, Judge Farmer had a legal dutyprovide the document was a clear legal duty that Judge Farmer, as the trial judge, has failed to4See, e.g.,State, ex rel.Master v. City of Cleveland, 75Ohio St.3d 23, 26-27, 1996-Ohio-180, 184.Page 3 perform. This defect also precludes mandamus relief for Christner in this action.
6 In conclusion, Christner is seeking to h
In conclusion, Christner is seeking to have his criminal conviction and sentence reversedby this Court as if they were before this Court on direct appeal. He has failed to demonstrateSuite 510Canton, Ohio 44702-1413 PROOF OF SERVICEof the foregoingRESPONSE AND MOTIONTO DISMISS was sent by ordinaryU.S. mail this 31 st day of May, 2013, to ALFRED CHRISTER, relatorpro se,at Inmate No.7^1 ANEE M. WATSONOhio Sup. Ct. Reg. No. 0072906Att