State ex rel. Barr v. Sutula

2012 Ohio 2790, 132 Ohio St. 3d 297
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedJune 26, 2012
Docket2012-0498
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 2012 Ohio 2790 (State ex rel. Barr v. Sutula) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State ex rel. Barr v. Sutula, 2012 Ohio 2790, 132 Ohio St. 3d 297 (Ohio 2012).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the petition of appellant, Harry M. Barr, for a writ of mandamus to compel appellee, Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Judge John D. Sutula, to correct his sentencing entry to reflect the sentence specified at the court’s “verdict hearing.” Barr had an adequate remedy by way of appeal from his sentencing entry to raise his claim of sentencing error. See State ex rel. Hudson v. Sutula, 131 Ohio St.3d 177, 2012-Ohio-554, 962 N.E.2d 798, ¶ 1; R.C. 2731.05.

Judgment affirmed.

O’Connor, C.J., and Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, Cupp, and McGee Brown, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State ex rel. Samples v. Heath
2013 Ohio 66 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2013)
Lenard v. Russo
2012 Ohio 4294 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2012 Ohio 2790, 132 Ohio St. 3d 297, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-barr-v-sutula-ohio-2012.