[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 83 Ohio St.3d 110.]

THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLEE, v. HURSTON, APPELLANT. [Cite as State v. Hurston, 1998-Ohio-560.]

Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed on the authority of State v. Rush. (No. 97-2677—Submitted August 19, 1998—Decided September 16, 1998.)

APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Montgomery County, No. CA-16217. __________________ Mathias H. Heck, Jr., Montgomery County Prosecuting Attorney, and Karen L. Sollars, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.

Raymond Hurston, pro se. __________________ {¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed on the authority of State v. Rush (1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 53, 697 N.E.2d 634.

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