Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, Cuyahoga
STATE OF OHIO, EX REL. YURIY I. KHANIN RELATOR
HON. MAUREEN CLANCY, JUDGE RESPONDENT
of Mandamus Motion No. 514261 Order No. 514654
RELATOR Yuriy I. Khanin, pro se Inmate No. A454714 Marion
ATTORNEYS FOR RESPONDENT Michael C. O'Malley Cuyahoga
County Prosecutor By: James E. Moss Assistant County
Prosecutor The Justice Center .
JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION
PATRICIA ANN BLACKMON, JUDGE.
Relator, Yuriy I. Khanin, seeks a writ of mandamus compelling
respondent, Judge Maureen Clancy, to resentence him. Khanin
argues that the respondent judge is required to impose a
period of postrelease control and her refusal to do so
entitles Khanin to the relief sought through mandamus. Having
reviewed the record and pertinent law, we grant the
respondent judge's motion for summary judgment. The
apposite facts follow.
In 2003, Khanin was sentenced to an agreed prison term of 35
years to life. This sentence was imposed for convictions for
aggravated murder, aggravated robbery, and kidnapping.
However, the trial court did not impose any period of
Khanin filed a notice of appeal and a motion for leave to
file a delayed appeal in 2004. This court dismissed the
untimely appeal that same year.
In October 2017, Khanin filed a "motion for new sentence
pursuant to R.C. 2929.191." On November 14, 2017, the
trial court denied the motion. After that, the respondent
judge received a reply brief filed by Khanin, and again
denied the motion on December 15, 2017.
On January 3, 2018, Khanin instituted this action attempting
to require the respondent judge to hold a new sentencing
hearing. The state, on behalf of the respondent judge, filed
a motion for summary judgment on January 26, 2018. The main
argument advanced was that the respondent judge lost
jurisdiction to impose any period of postrelease control on
Khanin because he had completely served the sentences on
which postrelease control applied. We agree.
for a Writ of Mandamus
The fundamental criteria for issuing a writ of mandamus are
well established. "In order to be entitled to a writ of
mandamus, relator must show (1) that he has a clear legal
right to the relief prayed for, (2) that respondents are
under a clear legal duty to perform the acts, and (3) that
relator has no plain and adequate remedy in the ordinary
course of the law." State ex rel. Harris v.
Rhodes, 54 Ohio St.2d 41, 42, 374 N.E.2d 641 (1978),
citing State ex rel. Natl. City Bank v. Bd. of Edn.,
52 Ohio St.2d 81, 369 N.E.2d 1200 (1977). All three of these
requirements must be met in order for mandamus to lie.
Jurisdiction to Act
The respondent judge is under no clear legal duty to perform
the requested act. While a trial court is required to impose
postrelease control, when applicable, at sentencing and
incorporate the advisement into the journal entry of
sentence, the respondent judge has no authority to impose
postrelease control on Khanin's aggravated robbery and
kidnapping convictions because Khanin has fully served those
five-year prison terms.
The Ohio Administrative Code details the manner in which