Court Filings

The Tenth District Court of Appeals denied Lorenza Barnette’s petition for a writ of mandamus and granted the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction’s motion for summary judgment. Barnette sought an order directing the Department to change its records to reflect that his June 28, 2021 entry imposed no prison sentence. The court concluded the 2011 judgment imposing two life-without-parole terms (plus additional consecutive terms) remains the operative sentence. The 2019 entry imposing post-release control was vacated on appeal and the 2021 entry only notified him of post-release control for kidnapping, not resentencing.

The Ohio Eighth District Court of Appeals denied Latoya J. Yancy’s App.R. 26(B) application to reopen her direct criminal appeal. Yancy claimed appellate counsel was ineffective for not challenging various trial errors, including prosecutorial misconduct, failure to move to suppress, and failure to present mitigating evidence. The court found no record support that appellate counsel performed deficiently or that Yancy suffered prejudice; many issues had already been considered on direct appeal or lacked record evidence. Because the record did not show a colorable ineffective-assistance claim, the application to reopen was denied.

The Ohio Supreme Court denied mandamus relief to inmate-relator Devin D. Howard against the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction’s chief inspector’s office. Howard had appealed an institutional grievance and included a request for two correction-officer work schedules and copies of two ODRC policies. The inspector’s office maintained it did not view the grievance appeal as a public-records request and therefore did not respond as a records custodian. The Court concluded Howard did not carry his burden to show he clearly submitted a public-records request in that context, and it denied the writ and his requests for statutory damages and costs.

The Seventh District Court of Appeals denied Alan Harris Jr.’s App.R. 26(B) application to reopen his 2025 direct appeal. Harris argued appellate counsel was ineffective for not raising challenges to his sentence and plea, and he filed a late supplemental claim that his plea was involuntary because of alleged deficiencies outside the record. The court found the supplement untimely, held that the plea waived many challenges (including failure to file a suppression motion), and determined the plea colloquy and sentencing record did not show reversible error. The application to reopen was denied for lack of merit and timeliness.

The court denied Keimarkus Woodard’s petition for a writ of mandamus seeking a new parole-revocation hearing, an acquittal of alleged parole violations, and removal from post-release control. The Tenth District adopted the magistrate’s findings that the Ohio Adult Parole Authority (OAPA) complied with due process and that the hearing officer’s findings that Woodard violated conditions of supervision were supported by substantial evidence (including agent testimony and a seized packet testing positive for fentanyl). The court concluded Woodard failed to show OAPA had a clear legal duty to find him not guilty or that OAPA abused its discretion.

The Ohio Supreme Court denied an inmate’s petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to force the Grafton Correctional Institution warden to place him in the opioid-treatment track (OTP) of the state medication-assisted-treatment (MAT) program. The court found that the inmate did not show by clear and convincing evidence that he had a clear legal right to receive buprenorphine or methadone specifically, or that the warden had a clear legal duty to provide that particular treatment. The court also held the inmate had an adequate remedy at law (a motion to enforce the trial court’s amended order).

The Ohio Supreme Court denied a mandamus petition by Jocelyn Rosnick (ACLU of Ohio) seeking contracts and related documents the Geauga County Sheriff’s Office allegedly executed with DHS, ICE, or the U.S. Marshals Service between June 1, 2024 and March 3, 2025. The sheriff’s office initially cited federal-law restrictions for denial but later submitted a records-clerk affidavit stating it did not execute any such contracts during that period. Because Rosnick failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that responsive records exist and were withheld, the court denied the writ and denied statutory damages, attorney fees, and costs. A motion to file late rebuttal evidence was also denied as untimely.