State ex rel. Peterson v. Durkin
This text of 2011 Ohio 2639 (State ex rel. Peterson v. Durkin) 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 petition of appellant, Bobbie Peterson, for writs of mandamus and procedendo to compel appellees, Mahoning County Court of Common Pleas Judge John M. Durkin and the common pleas court, to enter a sentencing entry that complies with Crim.R. 32(C) and properly imposes postrelease control. Judge Durkin’s February 27, 2007 sentencing entry fully complied with Crim.R. 32(C) by including his guilty plea, the sentence, the judge’s signature, and the time stamp indicating the entry upon the journal by the clerk of court. The entry also included sufficient language that postrelease control was part of his sentence so as to give appellant sufficient notice to raise any claimed errors on appeal rather than by extraordinary writ. See 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; Watkins v. Collins, 111 Ohio St.3d 425, 2006-Ohio-5082, 857 N.E.2d 78, ¶ 51-53.
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 2639, 129 Ohio St. 3d 213, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-peterson-v-durkin-ohio-2011.