State ex rel. Smith v. Columbus - Ohio Supreme Court Opinion - Ohio Supreme Court Decision

	ROMINGER LEGAL
		Ohio Court Cases and Opinions - Ohio Legal Research
					Need Legal Help?
					Need Legal Help?
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER			LEGAL HEADLINES - CASE LAW - LEGAL FORMS	NOT FINDING WHAT YOU NEED? -RESEARCH

This court case was taken from the web sites of the Ohio Courts. Search our site for more cases - CLICK HERE

LEGAL RESEARCH

COURT REPORTERS

PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS

PROCESS SERVERS

DOCUMENT RETRIEVERS

EXPERT WITNESSES

Find a Private Investigator

Find an Expert Witness

Find a Process Server

Case Law - save on Lexis / WestLaw.

Legal News - Legal Headlines

OPINIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO
The full texts of the opinions of the Supreme Court of
Ohio are being transmitted electronically beginning May 27,
1992, pursuant to a pilot project implemented by Chief Justice
Thomas J. Moyer.
Please call any errors to the attention of the Reporter's
Office of the Supreme Court of Ohio. Attention: Walter S.
Kobalka, Reporter, or Deborah J. Whitten, Administrative
Assistant. Tel.: (614) 466-4961; in Ohio 1-800-826-9010.
Your comments on this pilot project are also welcome.
NOTE: Corrections may be made by the Supreme Court to the
full texts of the opinions after they have been released
electronically to the public. The reader is therefore advised
to check the bound volumes of Ohio St.3d published by West
Publishing Company for the final versions of these opinions.
The advance sheets to Ohio St.3d will also contain the volume
and page numbers where the opinions will be found in the bound
volumes of the Ohio Official Reports.

The State ex rel. Smith, Appellant, v. City of Columbus et al.,
Appellees.
[Cite as State ex rel. Smith v. Columbus (1993), Ohio
St.3d .]
Mandamus to compel DNA testing of convicted rapist who does not
advance any argument or authority for this claimed
constitutional right under Due Process and Equal
Protection Clauses to such testing -- Writ denied, when --
Vague allegations of denial of due process or equal
protection are not sufficient to establish a clear right
or duty for purpose of a writ of mandamus.
(No. 92-2601 -- Submitted March 9, 1993 -- Decided May 19,
1993.)
Appeal from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No.
91AP-1160.

Walter D. Smith, pro se.
Ronald J. O'Brien, City Attorney, for appellee city of
Columbus.
Michael Miller, Franklin County Prosecuting Attorney, and
Scott T. Zalenski, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for
appellees Court of Common Pleas of Franklin County and Franklin
County Clerk of Courts.

Per Curiam. Appellant, Walter D. Smith, was convicted of
rape and other felonies. He filed a complaint for a writ of
mandamus seeking certain public records. He subsequently made
a request for DNA testing. The court of appeals granted
respondents-appellees' motions for summary judgment, holding
that appellees, the Court of Common Pleas of Franklin County,
the clerk of such court, and the city of Columbus, had
satisfied all requests for public records in their possession
and that appellant had established no clear right to have
appellees conduct DNA testing on his behalf.
On appeal, appellant raises only the issue of DNA
testing. He claims a constitutional right under the Due
Process and Equal Protection Clauses to such testing, but does
not advance any argument or authority for this supposed right,

or explain how appellees have a clear duty to provide the
alleged right. Vague allegations of denial of due process or
equal protection are not sufficient to establish a clear right
or duty for purpose of a writ of mandamus. This court has
previously dismissed such issues as if they were not briefed.
See State ex rel. Brooks v. Trans World Airlines, Inc. (1990),
53 Ohio St.3d 713, 560 N.E.2d 772.
Accordingly, the judgment of the court of appeals is
affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
Moyer, C.J., A.W. Sweeney, Douglas, Wright, Resnick, F.E.
Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur.