Whoever is unlawfully restrained of his liberty, or entitled to the custody of another, of which custody such person is unlawfully deprived, may prosecute a writ of habeas corpus, to inquire into the cause of such imprisonment, restraint, or deprivation.
State ex rel. Cannon v. Mohr (Slip Opinion), 2018 Ohio 4184 (Ohio 2018). “No. CR-178828A. And in 1985, he pleaded guilty to one count of escape, with specifications, and was sentenced to a term of 1½ to 5 years.”
Scott v. Houk, 2010 Ohio 5805 (Ohio 2010). · cites it 4ד21 (postconviction-relief procedure for persons convicted of crimes, including those sentenced to death); and R.C. 2725.01 (state habeas corpus petition).”
Leyman v. Bradshaw (Slip Opinion), 2016 Ohio 1093 (Ohio 2016). “*524 Merits {¶ 8} To be entitled to a writ of habeas corpus, Leyman must show that he is being unlawfully restrained of his liberty, R.C. 2725.01, and that he is entitled to an “immediate release from prison or some other physical confinement,” Scanlon v.”
Daniel v. State, 786 N.E.2d 891 (Ohio 2003). · cites it 2דHe nevertheless contends that he is being “unlawfully restrained of his liberty” pursuant to the habeas corpus statute, R.C. 2725.01, because his felony conviction prevents him from exercising various rights and privileges enjoyed by the rest of the citizenry.”
State ex rel. Davis v. Turner (Slip Opinion), 2021 Ohio 1771 (Ohio 2021). “To be entitled to a writ of habeas corpus, Davis must show that he is being unlawfully restrained of his liberty, R.C. 2725.01, and that he is entitled to immediate release from prison or confinement, State ex rel.”
Steele v. Harris (Slip Opinion), 2020 Ohio 5480 (Ohio 2020). “Such a transfer “abates the jurisdiction of the juvenile court with respect to the delinquent acts alleged in the complaint,” so that all further proceedings relating to the charged act must be discontinued in the juvenile court, and “the case then shall be within the…”
State ex rel. Harris v. Turner (Slip Opinion), 2020 Ohio 2901 (Ohio 2020). “In August 2019, the Third District dismissed Harris’s complaint for failing to state a cognizable claim in habeas corpus. {¶ 4} Harris appealed, asserting six propositions of law.”
State ex rel. Pirman v. Money, 635 N.E.2d 26 (Ohio 1994). “R.C. 2725.01 provides that “[w]hoever is unlawfully restrained of his liberty, or entitled to the custody of another, of which custody such person is unlawfully deprived, may prosecute a writ of habeas corpus, to inquire into the cause of such imprisonment, restraint, or…”
Miller v. Walton, 840 N.E.2d 222 (Ohio Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 2ד{¶ 11} Turning to Miller’s challenge to the dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, we note that R.C. 2725.01 et seq. permits a person who has been “unlawfully restrained of his liberty” to apply for a writ of habeas corpus “to inquire into the cause of such…”
State v. Smith, 2016 Ohio 3521 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016). “But Smith’s motions were not reviewable under R.C. 2725.01 et seq., as petitions for writs of habeas corpus.”
McKinney v. Haviland (Slip Opinion), 2020 Ohio 4785 (Ohio 2020). “{¶ 5} The court of appeals granted Haviland’s motion to dismiss, concluding that McKinney’s complaint did not state a claim cognizable in habeas corpus.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.