State ex rel. Wynn v. McCormick - Ohio Supreme Court Opinion - Ohio Supreme Court Decision

	ROMINGER LEGAL
		Ohio Court Cases and Opinions - Ohio Legal Research
					Need Legal Help?
					Need Legal Help?
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER			LEGAL HEADLINES - CASE LAW - LEGAL FORMS	NOT FINDING WHAT YOU NEED? -RESEARCH

This court case was taken from the web sites of the Ohio Courts. Search our site for more cases - CLICK HERE

LEGAL RESEARCH

COURT REPORTERS

PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS

PROCESS SERVERS

DOCUMENT RETRIEVERS

EXPERT WITNESSES

Find a Private Investigator

Find an Expert Witness

Find a Process Server

Case Law - save on Lexis / WestLaw.

Legal News - Legal Headlines

THE STATE EX REL. ZANDERS, APPELLANT, v. OHIO PAROLE BOARD, APPELLEE.
[Cite as State ex rel. Zanders v. Ohio Parole Bd. (1998), ___ Ohio St.3d ___.]
Habeas corpus and mandamus to compel relator's immediate release from prison
-- Petition dismissed, when.
(No. 98-34 -- Submitted June 24, 1998 -- Decided July 29, 1998.)
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Lorain County, No. 97CA006960.

In November 1997, appellant, Lawrence Zanders, filed a petition in the
Court of Appeals for Franklin County requesting writs of mandamus and habeas
corpus to compel appellee, Ohio Parole Board, to immediately release him from
prison. Zanders claimed that the Ohio Parole Board erred by rescinding its
previous decision to release him on parole on or after a certain date and
subsequently denying parole pending disposition of remanded involuntary
manslaughter charges. Zanders attached copies of these decisions to his petition
but did not file an affidavit describing each civil action or appeal of a civil action
he had filed in the previous five years in any state or federal court, as specified by
R.C. 2969.25(A).

The court of appeals sua sponte dismissed the petition.

This cause is now before the court upon an appeal as of right.
__________________

Lawrence Zanders, pro se.

Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General, and Karen L. Killian, Assistant
Attorney General, for appellee.
__________________

Per Curiam. Zanders asserts in his sole proposition of law that the court of
appeals erred in dismissing his petition. For the reasons that follow, however,
Zanders's assertion lacks merit.

First, as the court of appeals held, Zanders failed to comply with the
mandatory requirements of R.C. 2969.25 in commencing his action. See State ex
rel. Alford v. Winters (1997), 80 Ohio St.3d 285, 286, 685 N.E.2d 1242, 1242-
1243. Like the appellant in Alford, Zanders does not assert that R.C. 2969.25 is
inapplicable to habeas corpus and mandamus actions.

Second, the Parole Board possesses discretion to rescind an unexecuted
order for a prisoner to receive parole at a future date. Hattie v. Anderson (1994),
68 Ohio St.3d 232, 233, 626 N.E.2d 67, 70. Zanders has no right to be released
before the expiration of his sentence. State ex rel. Lake v. Anderson (1997), 80
Ohio St.3d 491, 492, 687 N.E.2d 453.

Finally, Zanders was not entitled to a writ of mandamus because mandamus
is not the appropriate remedy for persons claiming entitlement to release from
prison. State ex rel. Smith v. Yost (1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 111, 112, 689 N.E.2d
565, 566.

Based on the foregoing, we affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.
Judgment affirmed.

MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and
LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur.

2