State Ex Rel. Castro v. Corrigan

2011 OH 4059, 952 N.E.2d 497, 129 Ohio St. 3d 342
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided August 17, 2011·No. 2011-0749·Published·Cited by 13 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the complaint of appellant, Jose Castro, for writs of mandamus and procedendo to compel appellee, a Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas judge, to conduct a resentencing hearing in Castro’s criminal case and issue a new sentencing entry that properly includes postrelease control.

{¶ 2} Castro essentially sought waiver of prepayment of the court’s filing fees by not paying them, instead filing a page with his petition that was titled “Affidavit of Indigency.” He thus failed to comply with R.C. 2969.25(C)(1), which required him to file a statement setting forth his inmate account “for each of the preceding six months, as certified by the institutional cashier.” Castro’s noncompliance authorized the court’s dismissal. See State ex rel. McGrath v. McDonnell, 126 Ohio St.3d 511, 2010-Ohio-4726, 935 N.E.2d 830.

{¶ 3} Moreover, Castro “had an adequate remedy by way of direct appeal from his sentence to raise his claim that he did not receive proper notification about postrelease control at his sentencing hearing.” Briseno v. Cook, 121 Ohio St.3d 38, 2009-Ohio-308, 901 N.E.2d 798, ¶ 1. And Castro’s sentencing entry “sufficiently included language that postrelease control was part of his sentence so as to afford him sufficient notice to raise any claimed error on appeal rather than by extraordinary writ.” State ex rel. Pruitt v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas, 125 Ohio St.3d 402, 2010-Ohio-1808, 928 N.E.2d 722, ¶ 4. Castro’s sentencing entry constituted a final, appealable order, and he had an adequate remedy by way of appeal to raise his claims. State ex rel. Tucker v. Forchione, 128 Ohio St.3d 298, 2010-Ohio-6291, 943 N.E.2d 1006, ¶ 1.

Judgment affirmed.

O’Connor, C.J., and Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, Cupp, and McGee Brown, JJ., concur. *343 Jose Castro, pro se. William D. Mason, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and James Moss, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.

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

State Ex Rel. Castro v. Corrigan, 2011 OH 4059, 952 N.E.2d 497, 129 Ohio St. 3d 342 (Ohio 2011).

2011 OH 4059 (State Ex Rel. Castro v. Corrigan) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Whitman
2019 Ohio 1854 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2019)
Herrington v. Lazaroff
2016 Ohio 7655 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2016)
State ex rel. Kimble v. Bur. of Sentence Computation
2016 Ohio 7409 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2016)
State ex rel. Morrison v. Bradshaw
2016 Ohio 2789 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2016)
State ex rel. Spates v. Donnelly
2015 Ohio 111 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2015)
State v. Minter
2015 Ohio 23 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2015)
State ex rel. Thomas v. Strickland-Saffold
2014 Ohio 5347 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2014)
Carley v. State
2014 Ohio 4483 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2014)
State ex rel. Muhammad v. State
2012 Ohio 4767 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2012)
State ex rel. Quillen v. Warden
2012 Ohio 4299 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2012)
McGee v. Sheldon
2012 Ohio 2217 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2012)
State ex rel. Agosto v. Gallagher
2012 Ohio 563 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2012)
State ex rel. Shepherd v. Astrab
2011 Ohio 5789 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2011)