Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Hudson v. Sutula

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided February 16, 2012No. 2011-1680PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Per curiam

{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the complaint of appellant, William Hudson, for writs of mandamus and procedendo to compel appellees, Judge John D. Sutula and the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas, to resentence him to account for his allied offenses of similar import. Neither mandamus nor procedendo will issue if the party seeking extraordinary relief has an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. State ex rel. Jelinek v. Schneider, 127 Ohio St.3d 332, 2010-Ohio-5986, 939 N.E.2d 847, ¶ 13. Hudson had an adequate remedy by way of appeal to raise the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Smith v. VoorhiesOhio Supreme Court · 2008
  2. State ex rel. Douglas v. BurlewOhio Supreme Court · 2005
  3. Manns v. GansheimerOhio Supreme Court · 2008
  4. State ex rel. Jelinek v. SchneiderOhio Supreme Court · 2010

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. State v. GrantOhio Court of Appeals · 2013
  2. State ex rel. Ridenour v. O'Connell (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2016
  3. State ex rel. O'Neal v. Bunting (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2014
  4. State ex rel. Culgan v. KimblerOhio Supreme Court · 2012
  5. State ex rel. Culgan v. CollierOhio Supreme Court · 2012

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API