Title: Durain v. Sheldon

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Cite as Durain v. Sheldon, 122 Ohio St.3d 582, 2009-Ohio-4082.] 
 
 
DURAIN, APPELLANT, v. SHELDON, WARDEN, APPELLEE. 
[Cite as Durain v. Sheldon, 122 Ohio St.3d 582, 2009-Ohio-4082.] 
Habeas corpus — Petition denied — One term of postrelease control for multiple 
convictions is proper — Claim that sentencing entry violated Crim.R. 32 
does not entitle petitioner to immediate release from prison pursuant to 
writ of habeas corpus. 
(No. 2009-0424 — Submitted August 11, 2009 — Decided August 19, 2009.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Marion County, No. 9-08-64. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the 
petition for a writ of habeas corpus of appellant, Robert Durain.  “If an offender is 
subject to more than one period of post-release control, the period of post-release 
control for all of the sentences shall be the period of post-release control that 
expires last, as determined by the parole board or court. Periods of post-release 
control shall be served concurrently and shall not be imposed consecutively to 
each other.”  R.C. 2967.28(F)(4)(c).  In addition, insofar as Durain claims that his 
sentencing entry violated Crim.R. 32, which would render it nonappealable, his 
remedy is not immediate release from prison pursuant to a writ of habeas corpus.  
See Dunn v. Smith, 119 Ohio St.3d 364, 2008-Ohio-4565, 894 N.E.2d 312, ¶ 10. 
Judgment affirmed. 
 
MOYER, 
C.J., 
and 
PFEIFER, 
LUNDBERG 
STRATTON, 
O’CONNOR, 
O’DONNELL, LANZINGER, and CUPP, JJ., concur. 
__________________ 
 
Robert Durain, pro se. 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
 
 
Richard Cordray, Attorney General, and M. Scott Criss, Assistant 
Attorney General, for appellee. 
______________________