The Supreme Court of Ohio has denied a Lancaster prison inmate’s motion to compel the Ashtabula County prosecutor to provide records to the inmate that have since been provided to the prosecutor.

The state’s high court also denied 35-year-old Alphonso Mobley Jr.’s request for statutory damages and court costs in the recent decision.

According to a case summary, Mobley alleged that the prosecutor received his public-records request Nov. 13, 2023.

He submitted a copy of a certified-mail return receipt signed by the prosecutor’s office, but he did not include a copy of the public-records request with either his complaint or submission of evidence, the decision noted.

Mobley sought paper copies of the prosecutor’s “certified statements for years 2016-21,” pursuant to a now-repealed law that required prosecutors to file annual statements regarding criminal prosecutions with the applicable board of county commissioners and, with respect to arson offenses, with the state fire marshal.

He also requested copies of the prosecutor’s records retention schedule and the “cashbook or journal for years 2016-22.”

According to the Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, Mobley was convicted in 2017 in the Franklin County Common Pleas Court on charges of aggravated arson, criminal use of chemical weapons and breaking and entering. He was sentenced to a prison term of 14 years.

Summary provided that Mobley had not received a response from the prosecutor at the time he filed the mandamus action Jan. 2, 2024.

The prosecutor filed a motion to dismiss, which the Supreme Court denied March 13.

The court at the time issued an alternative writ and ordered the submission of evidence and briefs from the parties.

The prosecutor’s office submitted an affidavit of an employee, who claimed she found no record of Mobley’s request upon being notified of the mandamus action, summary continued.

The employee’s affidavit detailed the actions she took to compile the documents Mobley requested.

The prosecutor mailed Mobley copies of the certified statements May 1, summary detailed.

The prosecutor’s office submitted as evidence copies — totaling more than 1,100 pages — of all the records it had sent Mobley, who agreed that he received all the documents he requested.

Relative to Mobley’s request for statutory damages, the court considered his assertion that the response to his public-records request was not timely.

“The prosecutor’s office argues that, even if it failed to timely respond to the request, Mobley has not shown by clear and convincing evidence either that he sent a request by certified mail or what records he asked for in that request,” the court wrote per curiam. “In its answer, the prosecutor’s office stated that it was without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of Mobley’s assertion that he made a public-records request to the office by certified mail. … Mobley submitted as evidence a certified-mail return receipt, but other than his own affidavit, which the prosecutor disputes, he submits no evidence linking the certified mailing to a public-records request.”

The court determined that Mobley’s request for court costs was offset by the affidavit of indigency he filed, “so even if he were otherwise entitled to costs, he has not incurred costs. We therefore deny the request,” the court wrote.