State ex rel. Bey v. McGookey

Summary

The Sixth District Court of Appeals of Ohio sua sponte dismissed Bobbie Bey’s petition for a writ of procedendo seeking to compel the trial court to rule on several pending motions in her criminal case. The court held that, because only the motion to suppress had been pending for more than 120 days and it had recently been supplemented, Bey could not show an undue delay warranting extraordinary relief.

Holdings

1. Bey was not entitled to procedendo because the facts alleged did not establish that the trial court had unnecessarily delayed ruling on her motions; the petition was therefore properly dismissed sua sponte.
2. Sup.R. 40(A)(3) does not create an enforceable right to relief in mandamus or procedendo, although the rule may guide the court in determining whether a trial court has unduly delayed ruling on a motion.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Bey was entitled to a writ of procedendo compelling the trial court to rule on her pending motions.
2. Whether Sup.R. 40(A)(3)'s 120-day motion-resolution provision created an enforceable right to relief in procedendo.

Disposition

dismissed