State ex rel. Reese v. Lisotto
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals. Judge Lisotto had no duty to issue findings of fact and conclusions of law on Reese’s second and third petitions for postconviction relief. State ex rel. Fuller v. Sutula (1999), 86 Ohio St.3d 301, 302, 714 N.E.2d 924, 924-925. And Judge Lisotto’s 1997 judgment entry denying Reese postconviction relief satisfied the requirement for findings of fact and conclusions of law. Gause v. Zaleski (1999), 85 Ohio St.3d 614, 615, 710 N.E.2d 684, 686.1
Judgment affirmed.
Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ.,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Gause v. ZaleskiOhio Supreme Court · 1999
- State ex rel. Fuller v. SutulaOhio Supreme Court · 1999
3Cited by3 opinions
- Snyder Elevators, Inc. v. BakerIndiana Court of Appeals · 1988
- State ex rel. Reese v. LisottoOhio Supreme Court · 2000
- State v. Mootispaw, Unpublished Decision (4-02-2001)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2001