Case Title: State ex rel. Carroll v. Corrigan

Citation: 1999-Ohio-367

Docket Number: 19981697

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 1999-03-03T00:00:00Z

Document:
THE STATE EX REL. CARROLL, APPELLANT, v. CORRIGAN, JUDGE, APPELLEE. 
[Cite as State ex rel. Carroll v. Corrigan (1999), 84 Ohio St.3d 529.] 
Mandamus to compel common pleas court judge to issue findings of fact and 
conclusions of law on denial of relator’s successive petition for 
postconviction relief — Writ denied, when. 
(No. 98-1697 — Submitted January 12, 1999 — Decided March 3, 1999.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County, No. 74561. 
 
In 1991, appellant, Daniel Carroll, was convicted of cocaine possession, 
carrying a concealed weapon, and having a weapon while under disability, with 
various accompanying specifications, and was sentenced to prison.  On appeal, the 
court of appeals and this court affirmed.  See State v. Carroll (1995), 72 Ohio St.3d 
87, 647 N.E.2d 784; State v. Carroll (June 10, 1993), Cuyahoga App. No. 62747, 
unreported, 1993 WL 204587.  In October 1993, Carroll filed a petition for 
postconviction relief, which was denied by the common pleas court in 1994. 
 
In December 1995, Carroll filed a second postconviction relief action, this 
time requesting that his trial court correct his “illegal” sentence.  In May 1996, 
appellee, Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court Judge Daniel O. Corrigan, 
denied the requested relief. 
 
Two years later, Carroll filed a complaint in the Court of Appeals for 
Cuyahoga County for a writ of mandamus to compel Judge Corrigan to issue 
findings of fact and conclusions of law on his May 1996 denial of Carroll’s second 
request for postconviction relief.  Judge Corrigan filed an answer and a motion for 
summary judgment.  The court of appeals granted Judge Corrigan’s motion and 
denied the writ. 
 
This cause is now before the court upon an appeal as of right. 
__________________ 
 
Daniel Carroll, pro se. 
 
2
 
William Mason, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and Erika Ritt, 
Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam.  We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.  Judge 
Corrigan did not have any duty to issue findings of fact and conclusions of law on 
Carroll’s successive petition for postconviction relief.  State ex rel. White v. 
Goldsberry (1996), 76 Ohio St.3d 271, 667 N.E.2d 391; State ex rel. Luna v. 
McGimpsey (1996), 74 Ohio St.3d 485, 486, 659 N.E.2d 1278, 1278-1279. 
Judgment affirmed. 
 
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and 
LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur.