Title: State ex rel. Paige v. Corrigan

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as 
State ex rel. Paige v. Corrigan, Slip Opinion No. 2011-Ohio-4057.] 
 
 
 
 
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-4057 
THE STATE EX REL. PAIGE, APPELLANT, v. CORRIGAN, JUDGE, APPELLEE. 
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it 
may be cited as State ex rel. Paige v. Corrigan,  
Slip Opinion No. 2011-Ohio-4057.] 
Habeas corpus — Adequate remedy by appeal to correct sentencing error — 
Denial of writ affirmed. 
(No. 2011-0478 — Submitted August 8, 2011 — Decided August 17, 2011.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County, 
No. 95864, 2011-Ohio-743. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals denying the request 
of appellant, Arnold Paige, for a writ of mandamus to compel appellee, Cuyahoga 
County Court of Common Pleas Judge Peter Corrigan, to vacate his sentence and 
resentence him.  Paige “had an adequate remedy by way of direct appeal from his 
sentence to raise his claim that he did not receive proper notification about 
postrelease control at his sentencing hearing.” Briseno v. Cook, 121 Ohio St.3d 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
 
38, 2009-Ohio-308, 901 N.E.2d 798, ¶ 1; Patterson v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth., 
120 Ohio St.3d 311, 2008-Ohio-6147, 898 N.E.2d 950, ¶ 8.  Paige also had an 
adequate remedy by appeal to raise his claims that his March 2004 sentencing 
entry contained incorrect terms of postrelease control.  State ex rel. Tucker v. 
Forchione, 128 Ohio St.3d 298, 2010-Ohio-6291, 943 N.E.2d 1006, ¶ 1; 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.  This disposition renders moot Judge Corrigan’s 
motion to strike Paige’s merit brief. 
Judgment affirmed. 
O’CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’DONNELL, 
LANZINGER, CUPP, and MCGEE BROWN, JJ., concur. 
__________________ 
 
Arnold Paige, pro se. 
______________________