Case Information
*1
[Cite as
State ex rel. Grinnell v. Reece,
T HE S TATE EX REL . G RINNELL , A PPELLANT ,
v.
R EECE , J UDGE , A PPELLEE .
[Cite as
State ex rel. Grinnell v. Reece,
procedendo and mandamus denied. (No. 2012-1720—Submitted February 27, 2013—Decided March 5, 2013.)
A PPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 12AP-207.
__________________
Per Curiam.
{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the complaint of appellant, Timothy Grinnell, for writs of mandamus and procedendo to compel appellee, Franklin County Court of Common Pleas Judge Guy L. Reece II, to resentence him by issuing a judgment of conviction and sentence that complies with Crim.R. 32(C).
{¶ 2}
“Neither mandamus nor procedendo will lie to compel an act that
has already been performed.”
State ex rel. Lester v. Pepple
,
S UPREME C OURT OF O HIO {¶ 3} Moreover, Grinnell’s discussion regarding the entry not being time-stamped is factually inaccurate. While the time-stamp on the copy of the entry attached to Grinnell’s petition is hard to see, the darker copy appended to Judge Reece’s brief clearly shows that the entry was stamped and certified by the clerk.
{¶ 4} Therefore, the court of appeals properly dismissed Grinnell’s claims for extraordinary relief in mandamus and procedendo.
Judgment affirmed. O’C ONNOR , C.J., and P FEIFER , O’D ONNELL , L ANZINGER , K ENNEDY , F RENCH , and O’N EILL , JJ., concur.
__________________ Timothy Grinnell, pro se.
Ron O’Brien, Franklin County Prosecuting Attorney, and A. Paul Theis, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.
______________________ 2
