COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT
                       COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
                           NO. 75759
STATE OF OHIO, EX REL.        :    PETITION FOR WRIT OF
ERNEL M. FOSTER               :    MANDAMUS
                              :
               Relator        :    MOTION NO. 3969
                              :
          vs.                 :    JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION
                              :
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS         :
CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO         :
                              :
               Respondent     :
                              :
DATE OF JOURNALIZATION   :    MARCH 4, 1999
JUDGMENT                 :    WRIT DENIED.
APPEARANCES:
For Relator              :    ERNEL M. FOSTER, Pro Se
                              No. A213-419
                              Allen Correctional Institution
                              P. O. Box 4501
                              Lima, Ohio 45802
For Respondent           :    WILLIAM D. MASON,
                                Cuyahoga County Prosecutor
                              RENEE L. SNOW, Assistant
                              Justice Center, Courts Tower
                              1200 Ontario Street
                              Cleveland, Ohio 44113
                               -2-
JAMES M. PORTER, A.J.:
     On December 30, 1998,  the relator, Ernel Foster,  commenced
this procedendo action against the respondent, the Cuyahoga County
Common Pleas Court, to compel the court to issue findings of fact
and conclusions of law for a postconviction relief petition which
Mr. Foster filed in September 1996, in the underlying case, State
of Ohio v. Ernel Foster, Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court  Case
No. CR-239911.  On January 20, 1999, the respondent, through  the
Cuyahoga County Prosecutor,  moved to dismiss  on the grounds  of
mootness.   Attached to the  dispositive motion was  a copy of  a
certified, signed and file-stamped January 19, 1999 journal entry
containing the requisite findings of fact and conclusions of  law
for Mr. Foster's petition.  This attachment establishes that  the
court has fulfilled  its duty to issue  the findings of fact  and
conclusions of law and that Mr. Foster has received the relief he
has requested, a resolution of his postconviction petition.   Mr.
Foster never filed a response to the dispositive motion.
     Accordingly, this writ action is moot, the dispositive motion
is granted, and  this writ action is  denied.  Respondent to  pay
costs.
ANN DYKE, J., CONCURS.
.