State ex rel. Foster v. DeWeese
This text of 2011 Ohio 6038 (State ex rel. Foster v. DeWeese) 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.
Opinion
{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the complaint of appellant, Joseph Foster, for writs of mandamus and procedendo to compel appellees, Richland County Court of Common Pleas and Judge James DeWeese, to issue a final, appealable order in his criminal case. Neither mandamus nor procedendo will compel the performance of a duty that has already been performed. See State ex rel. Rose v. McGinty, 123 Ohio St.3d 86, 2009-Ohio-4050, 914 N.E.2d 366, ¶ 2. Judge DeWeese’s April 3, 2007 sentencing entry in the criminal case fully complied with Crim.R. 32(C) by including the jury verdict upon which his convictions were based, the sentence, the signature of the judge, and the time stamp indicating entry on the journal by the clerk of court. See State ex rel. Williams v. McGinty, 129 Ohio St.3d 275, 2011-Ohio-2641, 951 N.E.2d 755, ¶ 1.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2011 Ohio 6038, 131 Ohio St. 3d 18, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-foster-v-deweese-ohio-2011.