2012 Ohio 2858
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- Relator Ivory Perdue filed a Complaint for Mandamus and/or Procedendo to compel resentence.
- Relator claimed his sentence was void because the trial court did not determine allied offenses of similar import.
- Relator filed a motion in the trial court; the trial court denied based on res judicata.
- Relator did not appeal the trial court’s denial; instead he filed the writ petition.
- Supreme Court Hudson v. Sutula held mandamus/procedendo unavailable where an ordinary remedy exists on appeal.
- Court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim; costs taxed to Relator.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is mandamus available when there is an adequate remedy on appeal? | Perdue asserts no adequate remedy because sentence deemed void. | Respondent maintains remedy lies on appeal, not extraordinary relief. | No mandamus/procedendo; remedy adequate; complaint dismissed. |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Hudson v. Sutula, 131 Ohio St.3d 177 (Ohio 2012) (adequate remedy by appeal; no extraordinary writ)
- State ex rel. Jelinek v. Schneider, 127 Ohio St.3d 332 (Ohio 2010) (non-jurisdictional; sentencing errors remediable by ordinary means)
- Manns v. Gansheimer, 117 Ohio St.3d 251 (Ohio 2008) (sentencing errors not jurisdictional; not cognizable in habeas)
- Smith v. Voorhies, 119 Ohio St.3d 345 (Ohio 2008) (allied-offense claims nonjurisdictional)