State ex rel. Villareal v. Ohio Dep't of Rehab. & Corr., 21AP-621

CourtUnited States Court of Appeals (Ohio)
Writing for the CourtDORRIAN, J.
Citation2022 Ohio 3402
PartiesState ex rel. Luis E. Villareal, Relator, Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction et al., Respondents.
Docket Number21AP-621
Decision Date27 September 2022

2022-Ohio-3402

State ex rel. Luis E. Villareal, Relator,
v.

Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction et al., Respondents.

No. 21AP-621

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Tenth District

September 27, 2022


IN MANDAMUS

Luis E. Villareal, pro se.

Dave Yost, Attorney General, and George Horvath, for respondents Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, and the Ohio Bureau of Sentence Computation.

DECISION

DORRIAN, J.

{¶ 1} In this original action, relator, Luis E. Villareal, requests a writ of mandamus ordering respondents Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, and the Ohio Bureau of Sentence Computation to correct their computation of his jail-time credit. On January 25, 2022, respondents filed a motion to dismiss this action.

{¶ 2} Pursuant to Civ.R. 53 and Loc.R. 13(M) of the Tenth District Court of Appeals, this matter was referred to a magistrate who issued a decision, including findings of fact and conclusions of law, which is appended hereto. The magistrate recommends this court grant respondents' motion to dismiss and dismiss this action.

1

{¶ 3} No party has filed objections to the magistrate's decision. The case is now before this court for review.

{¶ 4} No error of law or other defect is evident on the face of the magistrate's decision. Therefore, we adopt the findings of fact and conclusions of law contained therein. Accordingly, respondents' motion to dismiss is granted, and relator's complaint for a writ of mandamus is dismissed.

Action dismissed.

BEATTY BLUNT and JAMISON, JJ., concur.

2

APPENDIX

Rendered on June 23, 2022

IN MANDAMUS ON MOTION TO DISMISS

MAGISTRATE'S DECISION

THOMAS W. SCHOLL, III MAGISTRATE

{¶ 5} Relator, Luis E. Villareal, has filed this original action requesting that this court issue a writ of mandamus ordering respondents, Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction ("ODRC") and Ohio Bureau of Sentence Computation ("bureau"), to correct their computation of his jail-time credit. Respondents have filed a January 25, 2022, motion to dismiss as moot.

Findings of Fact:

{¶ 6} 1. Relator is an inmate incarcerated at Noble Correctional Institution.

3

{¶ 7} 2. ODRC and the bureau are governmental agencies responsible for computing release dates for Ohio inmates.

{¶ 8} 3. In Franklin C.P. No. 19CR-2311, relator received a three-year prison sentence for drug trafficking, with a stipulated jail-time credit of 587 days and jail-time credit for any additional jail time served while awaiting conveyance to the institution. In Franklin C.P. No. 18CR-3059, relator received an 11-year prison sentence for engaging in corrupt acts, and an 11-year prison sentence for drug trafficking, with a stipulated jail-time credit of 587 days and jail-time credit for any additional jail time served while awaiting conveyance to the institution. The two 11-year prison sentences in case No. 18CR-3059 were ordered to run concurrently to each other and consecutively to the 3-year prison sentence in case No. 19CR-2311, for an aggregate prison term of 14 years.

{¶ 9} 4. In both case Nos. 19CR-2311 and 18CR-3059, ODRC filed a December 23, 2021, notice of calculation of sentence. The notice indicated: in case No. 19CR-2311, for the drug trafficking conviction, relator received jail-time credit of 587 days; in case No. 18CR-3059, for the engaging in corrupt acts conviction, relator received jail-time credit of 597 days; and in case No. 18CR-3059, for the drug trafficking conviction, relator received jail-time credit of 597 days.

{¶ 10} 5. On November 24, 2021, relator filed the instant mandamus action asking this court to order respondents to correct their computation of his jail-time credit. He filed an amended complaint on November 29, 2021. In his complaints, he asserts that, pursuant to R.C. 2967.191, respondents had a clear legal duty to reduce his mandatory 3-year prison term in case No. 19CR-2311 by 587 days of jail-time credit and 10 additional days of jailtime he served while awaiting conveyance to the institution, for a total of 597 days of jail-time credit.

{¶ 11} 6. On January 25, 2022, respondents filed a motion to dismiss as moot pursuant to Civ.R. 12(B)(6), arguing that the record already reflects that relator was credited with 597 days of jail credit for the convictions in case No. 18CR-3059, which were to run concurrently to each other and consecutively to case No. 19CR-2311.

{¶ 12} 7. On February 7, 2022, relator filed a memorandum contra,...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT