State ex rel. McKinney v. Schmenk (Slip Opinion), 152 Ohio St. 3d 70

In 2004 McKinney was convicted after a single incident of multiple offenses (robbery, aggravated theft, receiving stolen property, and two counts of failure to comply) and sentenced to 20.5 years; on direct appeal the receiving-stolen-property conviction was reversed and he was resentenced in 2005 to 18.5 years.
On direct appeal McKinney argued robbery and aggravated theft and the two failure-to-comply counts were allied offenses; the Third District rejected that allied-offense argument and this court declined further review.
More than ten years later McKinney filed motions in the trial court to correct what he called void allied convictions/sentences and for resentencing; before the judge ruled McKinney filed a mandamus petition in the court of appeals seeking an order compelling the judge to merge allied convictions and issue a final sentencing entry.
The court of appeals granted the judge’s motion to dismiss the mandamus petition; McKinney appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court.
The Ohio Supreme Court reviewed de novo and held McKinney’s collateral attack on allied-offense findings is barred by res judicata because the allied-offense claim was raised and rejected on timely direct appeal; therefore mandamus relief was not available to relitigate that issue.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court must merge alleged allied-offense convictions now	McKinney: earlier sentencing entries are void for failure to merge, so judge must merge and issue a final order	Judge/State: allied-offense question was litigated on direct appeal and resolved against McKinney; no mandamus to relitigate	Denied — res judicata bars collateral attack; no clear right to relief
Whether mandamus is appropriate to obtain a final, appealable sentencing entry after a motion was denied	McKinney: Carnail allows mandamus where a sentence is void and no final entry exists	State: Carnail does not permit relitigation of an appellate court’s determination that a sentence is not void	Denied — Carnail not applicable when issue already decided on direct appeal
Whether res judicata applies when trial court failed to merge or made no allied-offense finding	McKinney: contends sentence is void despite prior appeal result	State: if trial court found offenses not allied or made no finding, res judicata bars later collateral attack	Held for State — Williams and precedent apply; res judicata bars the claim here
Whether mandamus lies because ordinary remedies are inadequate	McKinney: no final order; needs extraordinary relief	State: ordinary remedy (direct appeal) was available and used; issue resolved	Denied — McKinney has adequate remedy and already invoked it

Mitchell v. Lawson Milk Co., 40 Ohio St.3d 190 (procedural standard for accepting allegations on motion to dismiss)
State v. Williams, 148 Ohio St.3d 403 (2016) (res judicata does not apply when trial court expressly finds allied offenses subject to merger)
State ex rel. Carnail v. McCormick, 126 Ohio St.3d 124 (2010) (mandamus appropriate when original sentencing entry is void and no final appealable order exists)
State ex rel. Reynolds v. Basinger, 99 Ohio St.3d 303 (2003) (mandamus lies where trial court refuses or unduly delays rendering judgment)
State ex rel. Sampson v. Parrott, 82 Ohio St.3d 92 (1998) (mandamus will not lie to relitigate an issue after a plain and adequate remedy was unsuccessfully invoked)
State ex rel. Walker v. State, 142 Ohio St.3d 365 (2015) (reinforcing that mandamus cannot relitigate issues already decided)