Background
Marvin Benson was convicted of felony murder after his girlfriend’s six-year-old son died from blunt-force abdominal trauma. During the investigation, Benson admitted to kicking the child the night before and the morning of the child’s death. The Fifth District previously affirmed Benson’s conviction and sentence of 15 years to life.
In 2026, Benson filed a citizen criminal affidavit under Ohio Revised Code 2935.09 accusing Cambridge Police Detective Greg Clark of numerous offenses arising from Benson’s post-death interview. The common pleas court referred the matter to the Guernsey County prosecutor under R.C. 2935.10. The prosecutor reported that her office and the police department had investigated the allegations in 2025 and found no evidence supporting them. The trial court then dismissed the affidavit, and Benson appealed.
The Court’s Holding
The Fifth District affirmed. It first held that assigning the affidavit a civil case number was not error. A clerk is not required to file-stamp or assign any case number to an affidavit submitted under R.C. 2935.09(D), the trial court followed the statutory procedure, and the civil designation had no effect on the proceedings.
The court also rejected Benson’s demand for a special prosecutor. His affidavit accused neither the county prosecutor nor her husband of a crime, and it did not allege that Clark, a former city police detective, was a client of the county prosecutor’s office. The alleged fact that the prosecutor’s husband had formerly worked with Clark was insufficient to require a special prosecutor.
Finally, the court held that the trial judge’s duty under R.C. 2935.10(A) ended when the affidavit was referred to the prosecutor for investigation. The statute did not require the judge to review the prosecutor’s investigation or charging decision, give Benson an opportunity to respond to the prosecutor’s submission, issue a dismissal order, or provide findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Key Takeaways
- A clerk need not assign any case number to a citizen criminal affidavit under R.C. 2935.09(D), and the civil designation here did not affect the statutory process.
- The prosecutor’s marriage to a person who formerly worked with the accused detective was insufficient, on the allegations presented, to require appointment of a special prosecutor.
- Once a judge refers a felony affidavit to the prosecutor under R.C. 2935.10(A), the judge’s statutory duty ends; the statute does not provide for judicial review of the prosecutor’s investigation or decision not to prosecute.
Why It Matters
The decision clarifies the limited judicial role when a private citizen submits a criminal affidavit in Ohio. Referral to the prosecutor is one of the procedures expressly authorized by R.C. 2935.10(A), and after referral the statute does not create an adversarial process in which the affiant may challenge the prosecutor’s response before the trial court.
The opinion also applies that framework to two recurring procedural disputes: how the clerk labels the matter and when an alleged relationship involving the prosecutor warrants a special prosecutor. The court confined its rulings to the effect of the civil designation and the particular relationship alleged by Benson.