-1-
            COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT
                       COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
                           NO. 76422
STATE OF OHIO, EX REL.        :    PETITION FOR WRIT OF
DUNCAN PARHAM                 :    MANDAMUS
                              :
               Relator        :    MOTION NO. 10547
                              :
          vs.                 :    JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION
                              :
DAVID T. MATIA, JUDGE         :
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS         :
CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO         :
                              :
               Respondent     :
                              :
DATE OF JOURNALIZATION   :    OCTOBER 14, 1999
JUDGMENT                 :    WRIT DISMISSED.
APPEARANCES:
For Relator              :    DUNCAN PARHAM, Pro Se
                              No. A231-113
                              P. O. Box 788
                              Mansfield, Ohio 44901
For Respondent           :    WILLIAM D. MASON,
                                Cuyahoga County Prosecutor
                              DIANE SMILANICK, Assistant
                              Justice Center, Courts Tower
                              1200 Ontario Street
                              Cleveland, Ohio 44113
JAMES M. PORTER, A.J.:
     On May 11, 1999, the relator, Duncan Parham, commenced  this
mandamus action  to compel  the  respondent judge  to rule  on  a
                               -2-
postconviction relief petition, which Mr. Parham on February  20,
1998, filed in the underlying case, State of Ohio v. Duncan Parham,
Cuyahoga  County Common  Pleas  Court  Case No.  CR-258463.    On
September 8,  1999, the respondent,  through the Cuyahoga  County
Prosecutor, moved for summary judgment on the grounds of mootness.
Attached  to the dispositive  motion was a  copy of a  certified,
signed and file-stamped September 2, 1999 journal entry which read:
 Petitioner's petition to vacate or set aside sentence is  denied
without a hearing. This attachment establishes that the judge has
fulfilled his duty to rule on the petition and that Mr. Parham has
received his requested relief, a resolution of his postconviction
petition.  Mr.  Parham never filed a  response to the motion  for
summary judgment.
     The court further notes that findings of fact and conclusions
of law are not required for this postconviction petition.  A review
of the docket of the  underlying case reveals that on August  16,
1996,  Mr. Parham filed  another petition to  vacate and that  on
September 4,  1997, the trial court  issued findings of fact  and
conclusions  of  law  for  that  first  postconviction  petition.
Findings of  fact and  conclusions of  law are  not required  for
subsequent postconviction  petitions.  State  ex rel. Carroll  v.
Corrigan  (1999), 84 Ohio  St.3d 529, 705  N.E.2d 1226; Gause  v.
Zaleski (1999), 85 Ohio St.3d 614, 710 N.E.2d 684; State ex  rel.
Luna v. McGimpsey (1996), 74 Ohio St.3d 485, 659 N.E.2d 1278; and
State ex rel.  Jennings v. Nurre (1995),  72 Ohio St.3d 596,  651
N.E.2d 1006.
                               -3-
     Accordingly, the motion for summary judgment is granted, and
this writ action is dismissed.  Respondent to pay costs.
ANN DYKE, J., CONCURS.
.