STATE MARTIN v. OHIO ADULT PAROLE AUTHORITY (2009)

 {¶ 1} We dismiss the appeal of appellant, Robert Martin, because although he challenges the court of appeals' April 2009 judgment dismissing his complaint for a writ of mandamus and declaratory relief, he did not file a timely appeal from that judgment.   S.Ct.Prac.R. II(2)(A)(1).   Neither his motion for reconsideration nor his Civ.R. 60(B) motion for relief from judgment extended his time to appeal the judgment.  Cotten v. Fitzpatrick, 98 Ohio St.3d 24, 2002-Ohio-7043, 780 N.E.2d 1019, ¶ 6;  Key v. Mitchell (1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 89, 90, 689 N.E.2d 548.   Finally, a “Civ.R. 60(B) motion for relief from judgment cannot be used as a substitute for a timely appeal * * *.”  Id. at 90-91, 689 N.E.2d 548;  State ex rel. Richard v. Cuyahoga Cty. Commrs. (2000), 89 Ohio St.3d 205, 206, 729 N.E.2d 755.

Appeal dismissed.

PER CURIAM.

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