Vidales v. Christiansen, Unpublished Decision (4-28-2003)
This text of Vidales v. Christiansen, Unpublished Decision (4-28-2003) (Vidales v. Christiansen, Unpublished Decision (4-28-2003)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law.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.
Opinion
{¶ 1} This matter is before the court on the petition of relator, Andre L. Vidales, who requests that the court issue a writ of mandamus, pursuant to R.C. Chapter 2731, ordering
{¶ 2} respondents, Lucas County Common Pleas Judges Robert Christiansen and Frederick McDonald, to grant him credit for jail time served.
{¶ 3} In 2000, relator was convicted and sentenced for two separate offenses in respondents' courts. Relator insists that respondents denied relator 51 days of jail time credit he should have received at sentencing.
{¶ 4} A writ of mandamus is an extraordinary remedy which shall issue only on a relator's showing that the relator has no adequate remedy at law and that he or she has a clear legal right to the remedy sought.State ex rel. Pressley v. Industrial Commission of Ohio (1967),
{¶ 5} An erroneous credit of jail time is appealable, either directly, see, State v. Gregory (1995),
{¶ 6} Pursuant to State ex rel. Cossett, supra, we sua sponte dismiss petitioner's petition. Costs to petitioner.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Vidales v. Christiansen, Unpublished Decision (4-28-2003), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vidales-v-christiansen-unpublished-decision-4-28-2003-ohioctapp-2003.