Case Name: The State ex rel. Carroll, Appellant, v. Corrigan, Judge, Appellee
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1999-03-03
Citations: 84 Ohio St. 3d 529
Docket Number: No. 98-1697
Parties: The State ex rel. Carroll, Appellant, v. Corrigan, Judge, Appellee.
Judges: Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Ohio State Reports, Third Service
Volume: 84
Pages: 529–530

Head Matter:
The State ex rel. Carroll, Appellant, v. Corrigan, Judge, Appellee.
[Cite as State ex rel. Carroll v.' Corrigan (1999), 84 Ohio St.3d 529.]
(No. 98-1697
Submitted January 12, 1999
Decided March 3, 1999.)
Daniel Carroll, pro se.
William Mason, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and Erika Ritt, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.

Opinion:
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.