Case Title: State ex rel. Smith v. Sage

Citation: 1998-Ohio-126

Docket Number: 19980657

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 1998-09-23T00:00:00Z

Document:
[THE STATE EX REL.] SMITH, APPELLANT, v. SAGE, JUDGE, APPELLEE, ET AL. 
[Cite as State ex rel. Smith v. Sage (1998), ___ Ohio St.3d ___.] 
Mandamus to compel common pleas court judge to hold a hearing to determine 
whether relator should be released from prison on parole — Complaint 
dismissed, when. 
(No. 98-657 — Submitted June 24, 1998 — Decided September 23, 1998.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Butler County, No. CA98-02-024. 
 
In 1992, appellant, Rickey Smith, was convicted of felonious assault and 
aggravated burglary and sentenced to a prison term for each offense.  On appeal, 
the Court of Appeals for Butler County affirmed the judgment.  State v. Smith 
(Feb. 8, 1993), Butler App. No. CA92-08-154, unreported, 1993 WL 29049. 
 
In 1998, Smith filed a complaint in the court of appeals for a writ of 
mandamus.  Smith requested the writ to compel appellee, Butler County Court of 
Common Pleas Judge Michael J. Sage, the trial court judge in his criminal case, to 
hold a hearing to determine whether Smith should be released on parole.  Smith 
claimed that the Ohio Adult Parole Authority (“APA”) lacked authority to deny 
him parole because of Am.Sub.S.B. No. 2 and former R.C. 5145.02. 
 
After Judge Sage filed a Civ.R. 12(B)(6) motion to dismiss and the APA 
filed an answer, the court of appeals dismissed the complaint. 
 
This cause is now before the court upon an appeal as of right. 
__________________ 
 
Rickey Smith, pro se. 
 
John F. Holcomb, Butler County Prosecuting Attorney, and Daniel G. 
Eichel, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. 
__________________ 
 
2
 
Per Curiam.  We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals for the 
following reasons. 
 
First, Am.Sub.S.B. No. 2, 146 Ohio Laws, Part IV, 7136, does not apply to 
persons convicted and sentenced prior to July 1, 1996, and the court of appeals 
properly refused to retroactively apply the sentencing provisions of Am.Sub.S.B. 
No. 2 to Smith.  State ex rel. Maynard v. Corrigan (1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 332, 333, 
691 N.E.2d 280, 281; State ex rel. Lemmon v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth. (1997), 78 
Ohio St.3d 186, 188, 677 N.E.2d 347, 349. 
 
Second, former R.C. 5145.02 created no legal duty on the part of either 
Judge Sage or the APA to release Smith before the expiration of his sentence.  See 
State ex rel. Lanham v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth. (1997), 80 Ohio St.3d 425, 427, 
687 N.E.2d 283, 284.  See, also, State ex rel. Seikbert v. Wilkinson (1994), 69 
Ohio St.3d 489, 490, 633 N.E.2d 1128, 1130 (“Ohio law gives a convicted person 
no legitimate claim of entitlement to parole prior to the expiration of a valid 
sentence of imprisonment.”).  As the court of appeals correctly held, Judge Sage 
has no duty to hold a hearing to determine whether Smith should be paroled. 
 
Finally, Smith’s argument on appeal that Am.Sub.H.B. No. 300, 136 Ohio 
Laws, Part II, 2311, 2394-2395, supports his entitlement to the writ lacks merit.  
Maynard, 81 Ohio St.3d at 333, 691 N.E.2d at 281. 
 
Based on the foregoing, we affirm the judgment of the court of appeals. 
Judgment affirmed. 
 
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and 
LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur.