State ex rel. O’Malley v. Collier-Williams, Judge

Summary

The Supreme Court of Ohio granted a writ of prohibition preventing a common pleas court judge from empaneling a jury for a capital resentencing hearing after the defendant had validly waived a jury trial. The court held that the judge patently and unambiguously lacked jurisdiction under Ohio law and denied the request for mandamus as moot.

Holdings

1. A discretionary appeal constitutes an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law, and prohibition cannot be used as a substitute for that appeal. The availability of that remedy was sufficient even though the State might not prevail on appeal.
2. The trial judge patently and unambiguously lacked jurisdiction to invalidate Foust’s prior jury waiver and empanel a jury for his capital resentencing hearing. Under R.C. 2929.06(B), when the original trial was conducted by a three-judge panel, that panel or a new three-judge panel must conduct the resentencing hearing.
3. The request for a writ of mandamus was moot because issuance of the writ of prohibition resolved the requested relief.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial judge patently and unambiguously lacked jurisdiction to invalidate Foust’s prior jury waiver and empanel a jury for his capital resentencing hearing.
2. Whether the availability of a discretionary appeal under R.C. 2945.67(A) barred the State from obtaining a writ of prohibition.
3. Whether the State’s request for a writ of mandamus remained viable after issuance of the writ of prohibition.

Disposition

writ_granted