State ex rel. Studgions v. Saffold

2012 Ohio 1380
CourtOhio Court of Appeals
DecidedMarch 27, 2012
Docket97751
StatusPublished

This text of 2012 Ohio 1380 (State ex rel. Studgions v. Saffold) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State ex rel. Studgions v. Saffold, 2012 Ohio 1380 (Ohio Ct. App. 2012).

Opinion

[Cite as State ex rel. Studgions v. Saffold, 2012-Ohio-1380.]

Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA

JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 97751

STATE OF OHIO, EX REL., JAMIL STUDGIONS RELATOR

vs.

JUDGE SHIRLEY S. STRICKLAND SAFFOLD, ET. AL. RESPONDENTS

JUDGMENT: WRIT DENIED

Writ of Mandamus Motion Nos. 451612 and 451974 Order No. 453400

RELEASE DATE: March 27, 2012 FOR RELATOR

Jamil Studgions, pro se Inmate No. 573-653 Mansfield Correctional Institution P. O. Box 788 Mansfield, OH 44901

ATTORNEYS FOR RESPONDENTS

FOR JUDGE SHIRLEY STRICKLAND SAFFOLD, ET AL.,

William D. Mason Cuyahoga County Prosecutor

By: James E. Moss Assistant County Prosecutor Justice Center, 9th Floor 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113

FOR WARDEN TERRY TIBBALS

Mike DeWine Ohio Attorney General

By: Caitlyn Nestleroth Assistant Attorney General Crim. Justice Sect., Corr. Unit 150 East Gay Street, 16th Floor Columbus, OH 43215 EILEEN A. GALLAGHER, J.:

{¶1} Jamil Studgions has filed a complaint for a writ of mandamus.

Studgions seeks an order from this court, which requires Judge Shirley Strickland

Saffold to conduct a re-sentencing hearing in State v. Studgions, Cuyahoga Cty.

C.P. No. CR-523188, based upon the appellate decision as rendered by this court in

State v. Studgions, 8th Dist. No. 94153, 2010-Ohio-5480. In Studgions, this court

held that his convictions for the offenses of felonious assault and kidnapping were

allied offenses of similar import, which required merger upon re-sentencing. In

addition, Studgions seeks an order from this court, that requires the Warden of the

Mansfield Correctional Institution, Terry Tibbals, to convey him to the Cuyahoga

Cty. Court of Common Pleas for re-sentencing. Studgions request for mandamus,

however is moot.1

{¶2} Attached to Judge Saffold’s “notice of judicial action,” as filed on

March 13, 2012, is a copy of a journal entry that demonstrates Studgions has been

Judge Saffold has filed a motion for summary judgment, while Warden Tibbals has 1

filed a motion to dismiss the compliant for a writ of mandamus. Pursuant to Civ.R. 12(B)(6), Warden Tibbal’s motion to dismiss, as filed on February 3, 2012, is converted into a Civ.R. 56(C) motion for summary judgment. State ex rel. Boggs v. Springfield Local School Dist. Bd. of Edn., 72 Ohio St.3d 94, 647 N.E.2d 788 (1995); State ex rel. Baran v. Fuerst, 55 Ohio St.3d 94, 563 N.E.2d 713 (1990). re-sentenced with regard to the issue of allied offenses. Thus, Studgions’ request

for mandamus is moot. State ex rel. Jerninghan v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of

Common Pleas, 74 Ohio St.3d 278, 1996-Ohio-117, 658 N.E.2d 723; State ex rel.

Gantt v. Coleman (1983), 6 Ohio St.3d 5, 450 N.E.2d 1163. In addition, Studgions

possesses an adequate remedy at law through a direct appeal of the judgment of

re-sentencing, which prevents this court from issuing a writ of mandamus. State ex

rel. Toma v. Corrigan, 92 Ohio St.3d 589, 2001-Ohio-1289, 752 N.E.2d 281;

Brooks v. Gaul, 89 Ohio St.3d 202, 729 N.E.2d 752 (2000); Fraiberg v. Cuyahoga

Cty Court of Common Pleas, Domestic Relations Div., 76 Ohio St.3d 374, 667

N.E.2d 1189 (1996).

{¶3} Accordingly, we grant the motions for summary judgment as filed by

Judge Saffold and Warden Tibbals. Costs to Judge Saffold. It is further ordered

that the Clerk of the Eighth District Court of Appeals serve notice of this judgment

upon all parties as required by Civ.R. 58(B).

Writ denied.

EILEEN A. GALLAGHER, JUDGE

PATRICIA A. BLACKMON, A.J., and MARY J. BOYLE, J.

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

Related

State ex rel. Gantt v. Coleman
450 N.E.2d 1163 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1983)
State ex rel. Baran v. Fuerst
563 N.E.2d 713 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1990)
State ex rel. Jerninghan v. Court of Common Pleas
658 N.E.2d 723 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1996)
Fraiberg v. Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas
667 N.E.2d 1189 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1996)
Brooks v. Gaul
729 N.E.2d 752 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2000)
State ex rel. Toma v. Corrigan
752 N.E.2d 281 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2001)
Fraiberg v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas
1996 Ohio 384 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1996)
State ex rel. Toma v. Corrigan
2001 Ohio 1289 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2012 Ohio 1380, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-studgions-v-saffold-ohioctapp-2012.