Case Title: State ex rel. Peterson v. Durkin

Citation: 2011-Ohio-2639

Docket Number: 20110260

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 2011-06-07T00:00:00Z

Document:
Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as 
State ex rel. Peterson v. Durkin, Slip Opinion No. 2011-Ohio-2639.] 
 
 
NOTICE 
This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in 
an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports.  Readers are requested 
to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 
65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typographical or 
other formal errors in the opinion, in order that corrections may be 
made before the opinion is published. 
 
SLIP OPINION NO. 2011-OHIO-2639 
THE STATE EX REL. PETERSON, APPELLANT, v. DURKIN, JUDGE, ET AL., 
APPELLEES. 
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it 
may be cited as State ex rel. Peterson v. Durkin,  
Slip Opinion No. 2011-Ohio-2639.] 
Appeal from dismissal of a petition for a writ of mandamus and procedendo – No 
error in sentencing entry – Judgment affirmed. 
(No. 2011-0260 — Submitted May 25, 2011 — Decided June 7, 2011.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Mahoning County, No. 10 MA 155. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 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 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
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. 
 
O’CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’DONNELL, 
LANZINGER, CUPP, and MCGEE BROWN, JJ., concur. 
_____________________ 
 
Bobbie Peterson, pro se. 
 
Paul J. Gains, Mahoning County Prosecuting Attorney, and Ralph M. 
Rivera, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellees. 
_____________________