State ex rel. Earl v. Mitchell, 719 N.E.2d 545 (Ohio 1999). · Go Syfert
Search
State ex rel. Earl v. Mitchell, 719 N.E.2d 545 (Ohio 1999). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
7 citation events (2 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
How cited ↗
Cited for
q1 “claimed violation of r.c. 2945.05 is not the proper subject for habeas corpus relief and may be remedied only in a direct appeal from a criminal conviction.”0 citing cases2 citing courts quote it · Neutral (inherited from the case)
    Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
    The State ex rel. Earl
    v.
    Mitchell
    No. 99-1262.
    Ohio Supreme Court.
    Dec 1, 1999.
    Published opinion
    719 N.E.2d 545
    Jonathan Earl, pro se. , Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General, and Laurence R. Snyder, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
    Cook, Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Stratton, Sweeney.
    Cited by 4 opinions  |  Published
    Per Curiam.

    We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals. A claimed violation of R.C. 2945.05 is not the proper subject for habeas corpus relief and may be remedied only in a direct appeal from a criminal conviction. Jackson v. Rose (1997), 79 Ohio St.3d 51, 679 N.E.2d 684, 685; State v. Pless (1996), 74 Ohio St.3d 333, 658 N.E.2d 766, paragraph two of the syllabus.

    Judgment affirmed.

    Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.