On Monday, September 30, 2024, Deangelo Sanders filed a complaint for writ of prohibition in the Ohio Supreme Court against the First District Court of Appeals of Hamilton County and Judge Candace C. Crouse. Sanders, who is currently incarcerated at Madison Correctional Institution, is seeking to prevent the court from denying his motions related to a previous appeal.

The complaint asserts that Sanders’s rights to a fair process have been compromised due to the appeals court’s refusal to reconsider issues stemming from his appeal. He claims that crucial parts of the record were missing, which he believes the court is obligated to address. Sanders argues that these omissions have unjustly delayed his access to justice.

In the complaint, Sanders identifies himself as the relator and states that he has filed multiple motions, including a Motion to Correct Omissions and a Motion for Reconsideration, following the denial of his earlier petitions for Post-Conviction Relief and a Motion for New Trial. He contends that these actions are essential for the court to review his case fairly.

According to court documents, Sanders initially filed his Post-Conviction Relief Petition and related motions in February 2023. These motions were based on evidence, including an affidavit from a witness named Gracie Gallagher. The trial court eventually permitted Sanders to file a Motion for New Trial, citing the affidavits and his inability to obtain certain records from his appellate counsel.

However, the trial court later denied both his Motion for New Trial and his Post-Conviction Relief Petition without providing an opinion. Following this, Sanders appealed the decisions to the First District Court of Appeals, where he faced additional challenges. The appellee argued that Sanders could not support his claims based on Gallagher’s affidavit as the evidence was submitted unsigned.

On December 11, 2023, Sanders attempted to strike the appellee’s answer, citing its lack of coherence and improper formatting. Despite these objections, the First District Court continued with its proceedings and eventually ruled that the trial court’s judgment was correct, relying on only a small portion of the record available at that time.

In an effort to rectify the situation, Sanders filed further motions on April 11, 2024, including a post-appeal Motion to Correct Omissions, a Motion for Reconsideration, and a Motion for Enlargement of Time for Reconsideration. Nonetheless, on August 26, 2024, the First District Court of Appeals denied all of Sanders’s post-appeal motions.

In his complaint, Sanders argues that the court has a duty to correct any omissions in the record, stating that an appellant should not suffer due to clerical errors or oversights. He cites Ohio Appellate Rule 10, which directs trial clerks to prepare and transmit the relevant records upon notice of an appeal. He maintains that when discrepancies arise regarding the trial court record, they must be settled by the trial court itself.

Sanders underscores that despite both parties acknowledging the record’s incompleteness, the First District Court denied his motions based on a misinterpretation of promptness related to filing corrections. He emphasizes that the omission of the affidavit from Gallagher was not disclosed until the court’s ruling, which necessitated his immediate actions to correct the record.

The complaint highlights that, according to Ohio law, a writ of prohibition may be issued to prevent unauthorized judicial actions, and Sanders claims that he has no other legal remedy to address the injustice he faces. He argues that the Ohio Supreme Court must intervene to ensure that his rights are protected and that he receives a fair hearing regarding his case.

In conclusion, Sanders is requesting that the Ohio Supreme Court issue a writ of prohibition to prevent the First District Court of Appeals from denying his requests for corrections and reconsideration. He seeks to ensure that his case is reviewed fully and fairly, as he continues to assert his innocence in the criminal matter that has led to his incarceration.

A copy of the original filing can be found here.