COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT
                       COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
                            NO. 78774
CITY OF CLEVELAND             :
                              :      JOURNAL ENTRY
     PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE       :
                              :           AND
v.                            :
                              :         OPINION
MICHAEL EANES                 :
                              :
     DEFENDANT-APPELLANT      :
DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT
OF DECISION:                  MAY 31, 2001
CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING:      Criminal appeal from
                              Cleveland Municipal Court,
                              No. 2000 TRD 83374.
JUDGMENT:                     DISMISSED.
DATE OF JOURNALIZATION:
APPEARANCES:
For Plaintiff-Appellee:       Lauren C. Moore, Esq.
                              Chief Prosecuting Attorney
                              City of Cleveland
                              Kevin W. Rumes, Esq.
                              Assistant City Prosecutor
                              Justice Center - 8th Floor
                              1200 Ontario Street
                              Cleveland, OH 44113
For Defendant-Appellant:      James T. Millican, Esq.
                              Weston, Hurd, Fallon, Paisley
                               & Howle
                              2500 Terminal Tower
                              50 Public Square
                              Cleveland, OH 44113-2241
                               -2-
TIMOTHY E. McMONAGLE, P.J.:
     Defendant-appellant, Michael Eanes, appeals the judgment  of
the Cleveland Municipal Court finding him guilty of speeding,  in
violation of Cleveland Cod. Ord. 433.03, and operation of a motor
vehicle in willful or wanton disregard of safety, in violation of
Cleveland Cod. Ord. 433.02.  Appellant was sentenced to a $75 fine
for the speeding conviction and a $100 fine on his conviction for
willful or  wanton disregard  of safety.   The  trial court  also
ordered appellant to pay  court costs.  The docket reflects  that
appellant paid the fines and the court costs in full on September
26, 2000.
     Appellant sets forth two assignments of error:
          I.   THE EVIDENCE ADDUCED AT THE TRIAL  COURT
               FAILED TO SHOW THAT ANY TRAFFIC  OFFENSE
               WITH  WHICH THE  DEFENDANT  WAS  CHARGED
               OCCURRED AS ALLEGED IN THE COMPLAINT.
          II.  THE EVIDENCE ADDUCED AT TRIAL FAILED  TO
               SHOW A VIOLATION OF CLEVELAND  ORDINANCE
               433.02, RECKLESS OPERATION ON STREETS.
     The Ohio Supreme Court  has consistently held that  where  a
criminal  defendant,  convicted  of  a  misdemeanor,  voluntarily
satisfied the judgment imposed upon him or her for that offense, an
appeal from the conviction is moot unless the defendant has offered
evidence from which an inference can be drawn that he or she will
suffer some collateral  legal disability or loss of civil  rights
stemming from that conviction.   State v. Golston (1994), 71 Ohio
St.3d 224,  citing State v. Wilson (1975), 41 Ohio St.2d 236, and
State v. Berndt (1987), 29 Ohio St.3d 3.  See, also, North Olmsted
v. Jones (Mar.  13, 1997), Cuyahoga  App. No. 71112,  unreported;
                               -3-
Cleveland  v. Bawa  (June  3,  1996), Cuyahoga  App.  No.  69089,
unreported.
     In  this case,  appellant,  convicted of  two  misdemeanors,
voluntarily paid the fines and court costs, as ordered.  His brief
on appeal offers no evidence from which an inference can be drawn
that he will suffer  some collateral legal disability or loss  of
civil rights  resulting  from  his conviction.    Therefore,  his
assignments of error are rendered moot.
                               -4-
     This appeal is dismissed.
     It is, therefore, ordered that appellee recover from appellant
herein taxed.
     It is ordered that a special mandate be sent to the Cleveland
Municipal Court directing said court to carry this judgment  into
execution.
     A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the  mandate
pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure.
                                      TIMOTHY E. McMONAGLE
                                        PRESIDING JUDGE
MICHAEL J. CORRIGAN, J. and
TERRENCE O'DONNELL, J., CONCUR
N.B.  This entry is an announcement of the court's decision.  See
App.R. 22(B), 22(D) and 26(A); Loc.App.R. 22.  This decision will
be journalized and will become the judgment and order of the court
pursuant to App.R. 22(E) unless a motion for reconsideration with
supporting brief, per App.R. 26(A), is filed within ten (10) days
of the announcement of the court's decision.  The time period for
review by the Supreme Court of  Ohio shall begin to run upon  the
journalization of  this court's announcement  of decision by  the
clerk  per App.R.  22(E).   See, also,  S.Ct.Prac.R. II,  Section
2(A)(1).
 
.