COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT
                       COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
                            NO. 77360
STATE OF OHIO ex rel.         :
DONALD CASSIDY                :
                              :    PETITION FOR WRIT OF
     Relator                  :    PROCEDENDO
                              :
     vs.                      :    MOTION NO. 13654
                              :
JUDGE JOSE A. VILLANUEVA      :    JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS         :
CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO         :
                              :
     Respondent               :
JUDGMENT                      :    WRIT DENIED.
DATE OF JOURNALIZATION        :    JANUARY 27, 2000
APPEARANCES:
For relator       :           DONALD CASSIDY, pro se
                              #176-315
                              Grafton Correctional Institution
                              2500 S. Avon-Belden Road
                              Grafton, Ohio  44044
For respondent    :           WILLIAM D. MASON
                              Cuyahoga County Prosecutor
                              GAIL D. BAKER, Assistant
                              Justice Center, Courts Tower
                              1200 Ontario Street
                              Cleveland, Ohio  44113
                               -2-
ANN DYKE, A.J.:
     Relator, Donald Cassidy, has filed a complaint for a writ of
procedendo.  The  relator, through his complaint, seeks an  order
from this  court  that requires  the  respondent, Judge  Jose  A.
Villanueva, to render rulings with regard to motions for new trial
that were  filed in  the underlying  cases of  State v.  Cassidy,
Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case Nos. CR-182855 and CR-
186634. The respondent has filed a  motion to dismiss petition for
writ of procedendo and  motion for summary judgment,  which  this
court shall treat solely as a motion for summary judgment.
     Attached to the respondent's motion for summary judgment is a
copy of  a judgment entry, as  journalized on December 22,  1999,
which demonstrates that the respondent has issued findings of fact
and conclusions of law and has denied the relator's motions for new
trial.  The  relator's request for a  writ of procedendo is  thus
moot. State ex rel. Gantt v. Coleman (1983), 6 Ohio St.3d 5; State
ex rel. Jerningham v. Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas (1996),
74 Ohio St.3d 278.
     Accordingly, we grant  the respondent's  motion for  summary
judgment.  Costs to relator.
     Writ denied.
TERRENCE O'DONNELL,J.
   CONCURS                              ANN DYKE
                                   ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE
.