Ohio Supreme Court, 1966

State, ex rel. Turpin v. Court of Common Pleas of Stark County

Ohio Supreme Court · Decided October 5, 1966 · Brown, Herbert, Matthias, Neill, Schneider, Taft, Zimmerman

8 Ohio St. 2d 1; 220 N.E.2d 670; 37 Ohio Op. 2d 40; 1966 Ohio LEXIS 290

Cases that cite this one

23 later published cases cite this decision.

State ex rel. Dehler v. Sutula (Ohio 1995)
State ex rel. Dehler v. Sutula (Ohio 1995)
State ex rel. Penland v. Dinkelacker (Slip Opinion) (Ohio 2020)
State Ex Rel. Rose v. McGinty, 92578 (2-2-2009) (Ohio Ct. App. 2009)
McGrath v. Cuyahoga County Ct. Pleas, Unpublished Decision (8-27-2007) (Ohio Ct. App. 2007)
Wherry v. State, Unpublished Decision (12-4-2006) (Ohio Ct. App. 2006)
State Ex Rel. Hunter v. Hastings, Unpublished Decision (2-17-2006) (Ohio Ct. App. 2006)
Stadmire v. Common Pleas Court, Unpublished Decision (4-12-2006) (Ohio Ct. App. 2006)
State ex rel. Bunting v. Haas (Ohio 2004)
State ex rel. Kodak v. Betleski (Ohio 2004)
State v. Skipper, Unpublished Decision (6-10-2002) (Ohio Ct. App. 2002)
State ex rel. Wilson v. Ney (Ohio 1997)
State ex rel. Wilson v. Ney (Ohio 1997)
Yee v. Erie County Sheriff's Department (Ohio 1990)
Hamilton v. O'neill, Unpublished Decision (12-16-2005) (Ohio Ct. App. 2005)
State v. Resh, Unpublished Decision (12-30-2004) (Ohio Ct. App. 2004)
State v. Gondor, Unpublished Decision (12-30-2004) (Ohio Ct. App. 2004)
State Ex Rel. Baker v. Commmon Pleas Court, Unpublished Decision (2-17-2000) (Ohio Ct. App. 2000)
State ex rel. Pierce v. Court of Common Pleas (Ohio 1986)
State ex rel. Ferrell v. Clark (Ohio 1984)
County Commissioners' Ass'n v. Public Utilities Commission (Ohio 1980)
State v. Flowers (Ohio Ct. App. 1971)
State v. Turpin (Ohio Ct. App. 1969)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

Appellant filed his petition under the Post-conviction Remedy Act in September 1965. In spite of appellant’s requests, the court has failed to rule on such petition. The petition has now been pending for some 12 months. As was pointed out in State, ex rel. Vitoratos, v. Thomas, Judge, 175 Ohio St. 220, although judicial discretion cannot be controlled by mandamus, the writ may issue to compel the exercise of such discretion.

In view of the nature of the Postconviction Remedy Act, the purpose of which is to correct the denial of constitutional rights of an accused, and the prejudice which would result to the accused by delay if his grounds for relief were well taken, it would appear that prompt action on such petitions should be taken by the court. The delay in the instant case in acting on the petition is excessive.

The judgment of the Court of Appeals is, therefore, reversed, and the writ of mandamus is allowed.

Judgment reversed and writ allowed.

Taft, C. J., Zimmerman, Matthias, O’Neill, Herbert, Schneider and Brown, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.