State ex rel. Barr v. Sutula

[Cite as State ex rel. Barr v. Sutula, 132 Ohio St.3d 297, 2012-Ohio-2790.]
THE STATE EX REL. BARR, APPELLANT, v. SUTULA, JUDGE, APPELLEE.
[Cite as State ex rel. Barr v. Sutula, 132 Ohio St.3d 297, 2012-Ohio-2790.]
Criminal procedure—Mandamus to correct sentencing entry—Adequate remedy
by way of appeal precludes mandamus.
(No. 2012-0498—Submitted June 20, 2012—Decided June 26, 2012.)
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County,
No. 97456, 2012-Ohio-500.
__________________
Per Curiam.
{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the
petition of appellant, Harry M. Barr, for a writ of mandamus to compel appellee,
Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Judge John D. Sutula, to correct his
sentencing entry to reflect the sentence specified at the court’s “verdict hearing.”
Barr had an adequate remedy by way of appeal from his sentencing entry to raise
his claim of sentencing error. See State ex rel. Hudson v. Sutula, 131 Ohio St.3d
177, 2012-Ohio-554, 962 N.E.2d 798, ¶ 1; R.C. 2731.05.
Judgment affirmed.
O’CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’DONNELL,
LANZINGER, CUPP, and MCGEE BROWN, JJ., concur.
__________________
Harry M. Barr, pro se.
______________________