State ex rel. Swopes v. McCormick

2022-Ohio-4408 (Ohio 2022) · Supreme Court of Ohio · December 14, 2022 · No. 2022-0264

Summary

The Supreme Court of Ohio affirmed dismissal of Dominique Swopes’s mandamus complaint seeking to compel independent testing of a DNA evidence sample in a capital murder case. The court held that Swopes failed to comply with R.C. 2969.25(C) by not filing the required certified inmate-account statement with his original complaint. The court further held that this procedural defect could not be cured by amending the complaint.

Court
Supreme Court of Ohio
Writing for the Court
Per Curiam; Maureen O'Connor, C.J.; Maureen O'Connor; Jennifer Brunner; Pat DeWine; Patrick Fischer; Michael P. Donnelly; Melody J. Stewart
Jurisdiction
Ohio
Decision date
December 14, 2022
Docket number
2022-0264
Procedural posture
Swopes appealed the Eighth District Court of Appeals' dismissal of his original mandamus complaint against a common-pleas judge.
Standard of review
The Supreme Court reviewed the dismissal of the mandamus complaint for compliance with the mandatory filing requirements of R.C. 2969.25(C).
Precedential value
published and precedential Ohio Supreme Court opinion
Parties
Dominique Swopes v. McCormick, Judge
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

motions to dismisscivil procedureappellate procedureremediesevidence

Practice areas

civil procedureappellate proceduremandamuscriminal procedureevidence

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the Eighth District properly dismissed Swopes's mandamus complaint for failure to comply with R.C. 2969.25(C).
  2. Whether Swopes could cure the failure to attach the required inmate-account information by filing it with an amended complaint under Civ.R. 15(A) and (C).

Holdings

  1. An inmate seeking a waiver of appellate filing fees in a civil action against a governmental entity or employee must file the statutorily required affidavit and inmate-account information with the original complaint; noncompliance is a proper basis for dismissal.
  2. An inmate cannot cure a failure to comply with the mandatory requirements of R.C. 2969.25(C) by filing the missing information with an amended complaint.

Key quotations

Civ.R. 15 does not provide a safe harbor for an inmate’s failure to comply with R.C. 2969.25. (¶ 13)
Because the failure to comply with the mandatory requirements of R.C. 2969.25 cannot be cured, prior notice of the dismissal would have afforded [the inmate] no recourse. (¶ 14)

Factual background

Swopes was a defendant in a capital-murder case involving a crime-scene DNA swab designated Item 9.1. After the Bureau of Criminal Investigation performed testing on portions of the sample, the trial court authorized the State to consume the 25 microliters reserved for defense testing in a Minifiler analysis. Swopes sought mandamus relief compelling the trial court to permit him to independently test the sample, but he did not attach the required certified inmate-account statement to his original complaint.

Procedural history

In a pending capital-murder case, the trial court permitted the State to consume the defense-reserved portion of a DNA sample for additional testing. Swopes filed a mandamus action in the Eighth District seeking to compel the trial court to permit independent testing. The Eighth District dismissed the complaint because the original filing did not comply with R.C. 2969.25(A) and (C), and the Supreme Court of Ohio affirmed on the R.C. 2969.25(C) ground without reaching the merits of the mandamus claim.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…