COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT
                       COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
                           NO. 72842
STATE OF OHIO, EX REL.        :    PETITION FOR WRIT OF
TIMOTHY SIMMS, JR.            :    PROCEDENDO
                              :
               Relator        :    MOTION NO. 89277
                              :
          vs.                 :    JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION
                              :
KATHLEEN A. SUTULA, JUDGE     :
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS         :
CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO         :
                              :
               Respondent     :
                              :
DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT
OF DECISION                   :    DECEMBER 11, 1997
JUDGMENT                      :    WRIT DENIED.
DATE OF JOURNALIZATION        :
APPEARANCES:
For Relator                   :    TIMOTHY SIMMS, JR., Pro Se
                                   No. 310-050
                                   Mansfield Correctional Inst.
                                   P. O. Box 788
                                   Mansfield, Ohio 44901
For Respondent                :    STEPHANIE TUBBS-JONES
                                   Cuyahoga County Prosecutor
                                   DANIEL M. MARGOLIS, Assistant
                                   Justice Center, Courts Tower
                                   1200 Ontario Street
                                   Cleveland, Ohio 44113
                               -2-
JAMES D. SWEENEY, C.J.:
     Relator requests that this court compel respondent judge  to
grant the motion for production of transcripts and other documents
filed by relator in Statev. Simms, Cuyahoga County Court of Common
Pleas Case No. CR-320010 on June 26, 1997.
     Respondent has filed a motion to dismiss (Motion No.  86150)
attached to which is a copy of the journal entry granting relator's
motion which was issued by respondent and received for filing  by
the clerk on July 7, 1997. [ Sua sponte, we convert the motion to
dismiss to a motion for summary judgment.  See Civ. R. 12(B)  and
56.]   Respondent  argues  that  this action  in  procedendo  is,
therefore, moot.  We agree.
     Relator has  received the only relief  to which he would  be
entitled  in procedendo.   That is, the  respondent has ruled  on
relator's motion.  Although relator complains that a copy of that
ruling was not sent to relator, relator has not set forth any basis
for relief in procedendo.
     Accordingly, respondent's motion to dismiss--which has  been
converted to a motion for summary judgment--is granted.  Relator to
pay costs.
     Writ denied.
.