Title: State ex rel. Davis v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas

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. Davis v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas, Slip Opinion No. 2010-Ohio-
4728.] 
 
 
 
 
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. 2010-OHIO-4728 
THE STATE EX REL. DAVIS, APPELLANT, v. CUYAHOGA COUNTY 
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS ET AL., APPELLEES. 
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it 
may be cited as State ex rel. Davis v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas, 
Slip Opinion No. 2010-Ohio-4728.] 
Mandamus — Criminal sentencing — Final, appealable order — Mandamus not 
available to correct sentence to “resolve” counts for which there were no 
convictions or for which postrelease control was erroneously imposed — 
Adequate remedy at law — Sentencing errors not jurisdictional and not 
remediable by extraordinary writ. 
(No. 2010-0677 — Submitted September 28, 2010 — Decided October 14, 2010.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County, 
No. 93814, 2010-Ohio-1066. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals denying a writ of 
mandamus to compel appellees, the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
 
and Judge Bridget M. McCafferty,1 to issue a new sentencing order for appellant, 
James A. Davis Jr., so that it will be a final, appealable order. 
{¶ 2} Notwithstanding Davis’s claims, his sentencing entry was a final, 
appealable order.  As the court of appeals correctly concluded, our holding in 
State v. Baker, 119 Ohio St.3d 197, 2008-Ohio-3330, 893 N.E.2d 163, syllabus, 
“requires a full resolution of those counts for which there were convictions.  It 
does not require a reiteration of these counts and specifications for which there 
were no convictions, but were resolved in other ways, such as dismissals, nolled 
counts, or not guilty findings.”  (Emphasis added.)  State ex rel. Davis v. 
Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas, Cuyahoga App. No. 93814, 2010-Ohio-
1066, ¶ 8.  And the erroneous inclusion of postrelease control in Davis’s original 
sentencing entry2 constituted mere error for which he had an adequate remedy in 
the ordinary course of law by way of appeal.  See, e.g., Manns v. Gansheimer, 
117 Ohio St.3d 251, 2008-Ohio-851, 883 N.E.2d 431, ¶ 6 (“sentencing errors are 
not jurisdictional and are not remediable” by extraordinary writ); 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 (sentencing entry containing language that postrelease 
control was part of sentence afforded sufficient notice to defendant so that he 
could raise any claimed errors on appeal rather than by extraordinary writ). 
Judgment affirmed. 
 
PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’CONNOR, O’DONNELL, and CUPP, JJ., 
concur. 
 
BROWN, C.J., and LANZINGER, J., concur in judgment only. 
__________________ 
                                                 
1.  As of the date of this opinion, Judge McCafferty has been disqualified from acting as a judge 
pursuant to Gov.Jud.R. III(6)(A).  Judge William J. Coyne has been appointed to act on matters on 
her docket. 
 
2.  According to appellees, Judge McCafferty issued a nunc pro tunc sentencing entry on June 25, 
2010, removing any reference to postrelease control.   
January Term, 2010 
3 
 
 
James A. Davis Jr., pro se. 
 
William D. Mason, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and James 
Moss, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. 
______________________