On Wednesday, February 5, 2025, David A. Nixon filed a complaint for a writ of procedendo in the Ohio Supreme Court against Portage County Common Pleas Court Judge Becky L. Doherty. Nixon, who is currently incarcerated at the Lorain Correctional Institution, contends that Judge Doherty has failed to issue a ruling on his pending motion for a final appealable order within the required timeframe set by Ohio law.

The complaint alleges that Judge Doherty did not comply with Sup. R. 40(A)(3), which mandates that all motions pending before the court must be ruled upon within 120 days from the date of filing. Nixon claims that the deadline for ruling on his motion expired on December 25, 2024, leading to a deprivation of his rights to seek appellate review.

Nixon’s legal troubles began on May 12, 2022, when he was indicted by a Portage County Grand Jury on multiple charges, including having a weapon under disability, aggravated burglary, and grand theft. Following an amended indictment on July 11, 2022, which added a one-year firearm specification to the aggravated burglary charge, Nixon was ultimately convicted on all counts after a jury trial.

After his conviction, Nixon filed a direct appeal, which was upheld by the appellate court. However, he claims that the original indictments for aggravated burglary were not properly dismissed or resolved by the court, leaving these charges pending and placing him in jeopardy. This situation, according to Nixon, constitutes a violation of his due process rights.

On August 27, 2024, Nixon submitted a motion to the trial court requesting a final appealable order regarding the unresolved aggravated burglary counts. He argues that the trial court is legally required to address all pending charges, and failure to do so undermines the integrity of the judicial process and his right to appeal.

In his complaint, Nixon outlines the legal basis for his request for a writ of procedendo, describing it as an extraordinary remedy that commands a lower court to proceed to judgment. He asserts that he has a clear legal right to require the trial court to act and that there is no adequate remedy available to him through the ordinary course of law.

The complaint further states that Judge Doherty’s inaction has prejudiced Nixon by preventing him from pursuing his right to appeal. Nixon is seeking a court order compelling Judge Doherty to rule on his motion for a final appealable order, thereby allowing him to seek appellate review of his case.

In addition to his request for a writ of procedendo, Nixon has indicated that he is entitled to any other relief the court deems appropriate under the law. His complaint has been submitted in pro se, meaning he is representing himself without the assistance of legal counsel.

A copy of the original filing can be found here.