COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT
                       COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
                           NO. 72866
STATE OF OHIO, EX REL.        :    PETITION FOR WRIT OF
NEIL L. KLOSTERMEYER          :    PROCEDENDO
                              :
               Relator        :    MOTION NO. 89279
                              :
          vs.                 :    JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION
                              :
JUDGE WILLIAM E. AURELIUS and :
  JUDGE STUART A. FRIEDMAN    :
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                   :    NEIL R. KLOSTERMEYER, Pro Se
                                   No. 184-438
                                   Mansfield Correctional Inst.
                                   P. O. Box 788
                                   Mansfield, Ohio 44901
For Respondent                :    STEPHANIE TUBBS-JONES
                                   Cuyahoga County Prosecutor
                                   ARTHUR A. ELKINS, Assistant
                                   Justice Center, Courts Tower
                                   1200 Ontario Street
                                   Cleveland, Ohio 44113
JAMES D. SWEENEY, C.J.:
     Relator requests that this court compel respondent judge  to
issue a ruling with respect to the request for judgment on motion
                               -2-
on termination  of  imprisonment filed  by  relator in  State  v.
Klostermeyer, Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case Nos. CR-
177990 and 194751 on April 11, 1997.
     Respondent has filed a motion for summary judgment (Motion No.
85695)  attached to  which  are  copies of  the  journal  entries
overruling relator's motion and received for filing by the clerk on
July  29 and  30, 1997.    Relator has  not opposed  the  motion.
Respondent argues that this  action in procedendo is,  therefore,
moot.  We agree.
     Accordingly, respondent's  motion  for summary  judgment  is
granted.  Relator to pay costs.
     Writ denied.
.