State ex rel. Chavis v. Griffin

Summary

The Ohio Supreme Court affirmed the denial of a writ of mandamus sought by Carlos E. Chavis against Judge Burt W. Griffin. The court held that Judge Griffin had no duty to rule on motions in a criminal case assigned to Judge Daniel Gaul and noted that Criminal Rule 32.1 does not require findings of fact and conclusions of law for a ruling on a motion to withdraw a guilty plea.

Holdings

1. A judge has no duty to rule on motions in a case to which the judge was never assigned; therefore, mandamus relief against Judge Griffin was unavailable.
2. Crim.R. 32.1 does not require a court to issue findings of fact and conclusions of law when ruling on a motion to withdraw a guilty plea.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Judge Griffin had a legal duty enforceable through mandamus to rule on Chavis's pending motions when the case was assigned to Judge Gaul.
2. Whether Crim.R. 32.1 required the common pleas court to issue findings of fact and conclusions of law when ruling on Chavis's motion to withdraw his guilty plea.

Disposition

affirmed