State ex rel. Sands v. Culotta (Slip Opinion), 2019 Ohio 3784

Joseph A. Sands was convicted in 2006 of one count of engaging in a pattern of corrupt activity and five conspiracy counts (three for aggravated murder, two for aggravated arson); the trial court merged the conspiracy counts for sentencing and imposed a 20-year total sentence.
The Eleventh District previously affirmed the convictions and sentence.
In Sept. 2018 Sands filed a mandamus petition in the court of appeals claiming the trial court lacked jurisdiction because he was not charged by criminal complaint and seeking a preliminary hearing, a municipal-court complaint, vacatur of the judgment, and release.
In Nov. 2018 Sands filed a second mandamus petition seeking a new sentencing hearing and dismissal of all but one conspiracy conviction (asserting the counts were allied/offenses merged improperly).
The court of appeals dismissed both petitions (citing res judicata); Sands appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court, arguing among other things that the court of appeals failed to notify him before converting motions to dismiss into motions for summary judgment.

Issue	Sands' Argument	Appellees' Argument	Held
Whether the court of appeals erred by not notifying Sands of conversion of motions to dismiss into motions for summary judgment	Court of appeals converted motions and should have given notice	Court of appeals did not convert the motions; no notice required	No conversion occurred; therefore no notice required
Whether mandamus may be used to attack the validity/sufficiency of the charging instrument or to assert lack of subject-matter jurisdiction because no criminal complaint was filed	Judge Culotta lacked jurisdiction because Sands was not charged by criminal complaint; mandamus should compel charging under Crim.R. 3 and related relief	Mandamus is not available to attack charging instruments; Sands had an adequate remedy by appeal	Mandamus unavailable to attack charging instrument; Sands had an adequate remedy at law (appeal)
Whether mandamus should compel resentencing or dismissal of merged conspiracy counts as allied offenses under R.C. 2941.25(A)	Conspiracy counts were allied and should merge into a single conviction; sentencing entry was incorrect	Sands had an adequate remedy at law to raise allied-offense claim on appeal; mandamus is inappropriate	Mandamus inappropriate; Sands had an adequate remedy by appeal to raise allied-offense arguments

Coleman v. Portage Cty. Engineer, 133 Ohio St.3d 28 (court accepts factual allegations as true when reviewing a Civ.R. 12(B)(6) dismissal)
State ex rel. Russell v. Thornton, 111 Ohio St.3d 409 (standard for dismissal under Civ.R. 12(B)(6) in mandamus actions)
State ex rel. McKinney v. Schmenk, 152 Ohio St.3d 70 (de novo review of Civ.R. 12(B)(6) dismissals)
State ex rel. Waters v. Spaeth, 131 Ohio St.3d 55 (elements required to obtain a writ of mandamus)
State ex rel. Bennett v. White, 93 Ohio St.3d 583 (mandamus is not available to attack validity or sufficiency of a charging instrument)
State ex rel. Walker v. State, 142 Ohio St.3d 365 (relator has an adequate remedy by appeal to raise allied-offense claims)
In re G.T.B., 128 Ohio St.3d 502 (Ohio courts will not reverse a correct judgment merely because it rests on an erroneous rationale)