Ohio Supreme Court, 2010

State ex rel. Tate v. Calabrese

Ohio Supreme Court · Decided April 7, 2010 · Moyer, Pfeifer, Stratton, O'Connor, O'Donnell, Lanzinger, Cupp

2010 Ohio 1431; 125 Ohio St. 3d 28; 925 N.E.2d 962

Cases that cite this one

2 later published cases cite this decision.

State ex rel. Clutter v. Wiseman (Ohio 2010)
State ex rel. Tate v. Calabrese (Ohio 2010)

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

Per Curiam.

{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the petition of appellant, Eric Tate, for a writ of mandamus to compel appellee, Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Judge Deena Calabrese, to correct his sentence. Tate has already unsuccessfully sought correction of the same sentence by raising a similar claim for writs of mandamus and prohibition. See State ex rel. Tate v. Callahan, Cuyahoga App. No. 85615, 2005-Ohio-1202, 2005 WL 628520. Res judicata thus bars Tate from instituting a successive writ action. State ex rel. Essig v. Blackwell, 103 Ohio St.3d 481, 2004-Ohio-5586, 817 N.E.2d 5, ¶ 30; State ex rel. Carroll v. Corrigan (2001), 91 Ohio St.3d 331, 332, 744 N.E.2d 771.

Judgment affirmed.

Moyer, C.J., 1 and Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, and Cupp, JJ., concur.

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