From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cotton v. Russo

Supreme Court of Ohio
May 19, 2010
928 N.E.2d 1092 (Ohio 2010)

Opinion

No. 2010-0108.

Submitted May 12, 2010.

Decided May 19, 2010.

APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for' Cuyahoga County, No. 94116, 2010-Ohio-16.

Milton Cotton, pro se.

William D. Mason, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and James E. Moss, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.


{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals denying the claim of appellant, Milton Cotton, for a writ of mandamus or procedendo to compel appellee, Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Judge John Russo, to issue a new sentencing entry in Cotton's criminal case to comply with Crim. R. 32(C). Cotton's sentencing entry fully complied with Crim. R. 32(C), as specified in State v. Baker, 119 Ohio St.3d 197, 2008-Ohio-3330, 893 N.E.2d 163, syllabus. See also State ex rel. Agosto v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas, 119 Ohio St.3d 366, 2008-Ohio-4607, 894 N.E.2d 314, ¶ 10. And insofar as Cotton attempted to raise claims of sentencing error, he had an adequate remedy by appeal to raise them. Smith v. Smith, 123 Ohio St.3d 145, 2009-Ohio-4691, 914 N.E.2d 1036, ¶ 1. Finally, neither res judicata nor the law of the case precluded the court of appeals' denial of the writs.

Judgment affirmed.

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


Summaries of

Cotton v. Russo

Supreme Court of Ohio
May 19, 2010
928 N.E.2d 1092 (Ohio 2010)
Case details for

Cotton v. Russo

Case Details

Full title:THE STATE EX REL. COTTON, APPELLANT, v. RUSSO, JUDGE, APPELLEE

Court:Supreme Court of Ohio

Date published: May 19, 2010

Citations

928 N.E.2d 1092 (Ohio 2010)
928 N.E.2d 1092
2010 Ohio 2111

Citing Cases

State v. Saffold

{¶ 5} Additionally, Collins had a remedy by way of appeal to raise claims of sentencing errors. Relief in…

State ex rel. Martin v. Russo

{¶ 2} As the court of appeals correctly held, Martin's claims of sentencing error, including his…