Legal Opinion

Norton v. Green

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided July 11, 1962No. 37326Published

1Per curiam

Petitioner’s first contention is that he was denied dne process because he was represented by incompetent counsel. He appears to base this argument primarily on the fact that his counsel was subsequently convicted of a felony. This, of course, does not conclusively indicate incompetency. Counsel was of petitioner’s own choosing and, according to the record, appeared with him at each stage of the proceeding. Questions relating to the competency of counsel must be raised by appeal and not in a habeas corpus proceeding. McConnaughy v. Alvis, Warden, 165 Ohio St., 102, and Lewis v. Tinsely,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hammer v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
  2. Christian v. Dowd, WardenIndiana Supreme Court · 1941
  3. Davis v. RhayDistrict Court, E.D. Washington · 1957
  4. Lewis v. TinsleySupreme Court of Colorado · 1958

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API