If it appears that a person alleged to be restrained of his liberty is in the custody of an officer under process issued by a court or magistrate, or by virtue of the judgment or order of a court of record, and that the court or magistrate had jurisdiction to issue the process, render the judgment, or make the order, the writ of habeas corpus shall not be allowed. If the jurisdiction appears after the writ is allowed, the person shall not be discharged by reason of any informality or defect in the process, judgment, or order.
Howard v. Catholic Soc. Servs. of Cuyahoga Cnty., Inc., 70 Ohio St. 3d 141 (1994). · cites it 5דCSS relies upon R.C. 2725.05, which provides: “If it appears that a person alleged to be restrained of his liberty is in the custody of an officer under process issued by a court or magistrate, or by virtue of the judgment or order of a court of record, and that the court or…”
State ex rel. Pirman v. Money, 635 N.E.2d 26 (Ohio 1994). · cites it 5דRespondents assert that Pirman’s habeas corpus claim is barred by R.C. 2725.05 2 because she was lawfully confined by a court having competent jurisdiction.”
Howard v. Catholic Soc. Serv. of Cuyahoga Cty., Inc., 1994 Ohio 219 (Ohio 1994). · cites it 5דCSS contends that appellant was not entitled to habeas corpus relief because the juvenile court possessed jurisdiction to issue the preadjudicatory emergency temporary custody orders.”
State ex rel. Jackson v. McFaul, 652 N.E.2d 746 (Ohio 1995). · cites it 2דTherefore, while the most common situation in which the writ of habeas corpus will issue is when the petition successfully attacks the jurisdiction of the sentencing court, see R.C. 2725.05, habeas corpus will also lie to challenge a decision of the APA in extraordinary cases…”
Smith v. May (Slip Opinion), 2020-Ohio-61, 148 N.E.3d 542. “While the statute requires that written notice be given at least three days in advance, the juvenile court sent Smith’s father notice only one day before the March 27 hearing.”
Kneuss v. Sloan (Slip Opinion), 2016-Ohio-3310, 54 N.E.3d 1242. “Analysis {¶ 6} The court of appeals properly dismissed Kneuss’s case because he has or had adequate remedies at law through which to raise his claims.”
Greene v. Turner (Slip Opinion), 2017-Ohio-8305. “R.C. 2725.05. The few situations in which habeas corpus may lie to correct a nonjurisdictional error are those in which there is no adequate remedy at law.”
Bozsik v. Hudson, 852 N.E.2d 1200 (Ohio 2006). “2d 1241 : {¶ 9} “[E]ven if appellant’s claim of invalid waiver of counsel at trial were sustained, it would not be grounds for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus because the error did not deprive the trial court of jurisdiction over his case: Under R.C. 2725.05, if a person is…”
Freeman v. Maxwell, 210 N.E.2d 885 (Ohio 1965). · cites it 2דSection 2725.05, Revised Code, which is declaratory of the common law in this state, reads as follows: “If it appears that a person alleged to be restrained of his liberty is in the custody of an officer under process issued by a court or magistrate, or by virtue of the judgment…”
Appenzeller v. Miller, 2013-Ohio-3719, 996 N.E.2d 919. “{¶ 9} But no irregularity in the removal of the transcript could support Appenzeller’s right to the requested relief.”
State ex rel. Smirnoff v. Greene, 702 N.E.2d 423 (Ohio 1998). “04(D), requiring the attachment of a copy of the “commitment or cause of detention” to habeas corpus petitions, and R.C. 2725.05 (“If it appears that a *168 person alleged to be restrained of his liberty is in the custody of an officer under process issued by a court or…”
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.