DURAIN v. SHELDON (2009)

Supreme Court of Ohio.

DURAIN, Appellant, v. SHELDON, Warden, Appellee.

No. 2009-0424.

Decided: August 19, 2009

Robert Durain, pro se. Richard Cordray, Attorney General, and M. Scott Criss, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the petition for a writ of habeas corpus of appellant, Robert Durain. “If an offender is subject to more than one period of post-release control, the period of post-release control for all of the sentences shall be the period of post-release control that expires last, as determined by the parole board or court. Periods of post-release control shall be served concurrently and shall not be imposed consecutively to each other.” R.C. 2967.28(F)(4)(c). In addition, insofar as Durain claims that his sentencing entry violated Crim.R. 32, which would render it nonappealable, his remedy is not immediate release from prison pursuant to a writ of habeas corpus. See Dunn v. Smith, 119 Ohio St.3d 364, 2008-Ohio-4565, 894 N.E.2d 312, ¶ 10.

Judgment affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

MOYER, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O'CONNOR, O'DONNELL, LANZINGER, and CUPP, JJ., concur.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network