Ohio Supreme Court, 1998

State ex rel. Sampson v. Parrott

Ohio Supreme Court · Decided June 10, 1998 · Cook, Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Stratton, Sweeney

82 Ohio St. 3d 92; 694 N.E.2d 463

Cases that cite this one

38 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.

State v. Court of Common Pleas, Unpublished Decision (11-18-1999) (Ohio Ct. App. 1999)
State v. Friedland, Unpublished Decision (9-16-1999) (Ohio Ct. App. 1999)
State ex rel. Phelps v. McClelland (Slip Opinion) (Ohio 2020)
State ex rel. Olmstead v. Forsthoefel (Slip Opinion) (Ohio 2020)
Singfield v. Larose (Ohio Ct. App. 2019)
State ex rel. McKinney v. Schmenk (Slip Opinion) (Ohio 2017)
State ex rel. Walker v. State (Ohio 2015)
State ex rel. Fears v. Myers (Ohio 2014)
State ex rel. O'Neal v. Bunting (Slip Opinion) (Ohio 2014)
State ex rel. Pryor v. Martin (Ohio Ct. App. 2011)
Berman v. Wolfe, Unpublished Decision (10-15-2001) (Ohio Ct. App. 2001)
State ex rel. Gadsden v. Lioi (Ohio 2001)
State ex rel. Gadsden v. Lioi (Ohio 2001)
State ex rel. Lee v. Montgomery (Ohio 2000)
State ex rel. Billings v. Friedland (Ohio 2000)
State ex rel. Smith v. Fuerst (Ohio 2000)
State ex rel. Smith v. Fuerst (Ohio 2000)
State ex rel. Lee v. Montgomery (Ohio 2000)
State ex rel. Billings v. Friedland (Ohio 2000)
State ex rel. Jones v. O'Connor (Ohio 1999)
State ex rel. White v. Goldsberry (Ohio 1999)
Heddleston v. Mack (Ohio 1998)
Childers v. Wingard (Ohio 1998)
State ex rel. Beaver v. Konteh (Ohio 1998)
State ex rel. Johnson v. Bettman (Ohio 1998)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

Sampson asserts that the court of appeals abused its discretion by dismissing his complaint. For the following reasons, however, the court of appeals properly dismissed Sampson’s complaint for a writ of mandamus.

First, Sampson had adequate remedies at law by appeal or postconviction relief to review the claimed sentencing error. State ex rel. Massie v. Rogers (1997), 77 Ohio St.3d 449, 450, 674 N.E.2d 1383. Second, the fact that Sampson has already invoked some of these alternate remedies to raise his claim of sentencing error does not entitle him to extraordinary relief in mandamus. Where a plain and adequate remedy at law has been unsuccessfully invoked, a writ of mandamus will not lie to relitigate the same issue. State ex rel. Tran v. McGrath (1997), 78 Ohio St.3d 45, 47, 676 N.E.2d 108, 109. Finally, to the extent that Sampson’s complaint could be construed as a request for immediate release from prison, habeas corpus, rather than mandamus, is the proper action. State ex rel. Johnson v. Ohio Parole Bd. (1997), 80 Ohio St.3d 140, 684 N.E.2d 1227.

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.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.