State ex rel. Cunningham v. Lindeman
935 N.E.2d 393
Ohio
2010
Check Treatment

THE STATE EX REL. CUNNINGHAM, APPELLANT, v. LINDEMAN, JUDGE, APPELLEE.

No. 2010-0792

Supreme Court of Ohio

Submitted September 15, 2010—Decided September 22, 2010

126 Ohio St.3d 481, 2010-Ohio-4388

[Cite as State ex rel. Cunningham v. Lindeman, 126 Ohio St.3d 481, 2010-Ohio-4388.]

Per Curiam.

{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the claim of appellant, Willie Cunningham, for a writ of mandamus or procedendo to compel appellee, Miami County Court of Common Pleas Judge Robert J. Lindeman, to issue a new sentencing entry in Cunningham‘s criminal case to comply with Crim.R. 32(C). Cunningham‘s sentencing entry fully complied with Crim.R. 32(C), as construed in

, syllabus, by including the finding of the court upon which his conviction is based, the sentence, the signature of the judge, and the time-stamp journalization by the clerk of court.
, ¶ 3. The entry specified that Cunningham was tried and was found guilty by the court and that the court imposed no additional major-drug-offender term. Consequently, Cunningham had an adequate remedy by appeal to raise the claimed sentencing errors.
, ¶ 1.

Judgment affirmed.

BROWN, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O‘CONNOR, O‘DONNELL, LANZINGER, and CUPP, JJ., concur.

Willie Cunningham, pro se.

Gary A. Nasal, Miami County Prosecuting Attorney, and James R. Dicks Jr., Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.