Legal Opinion

Luna v. Russell

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided October 19, 1994No. 94-1125PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Per curiam

Luna asserts that the court of appeals erred in dismissing his petition for extraordinary relief. Generally, when the petitioner does not attack the jurisdiction of the court, habeas corpus will be denied. R.C. 2725.05; Stahl v. Shoemaker (1977), 50 Ohio St.2d 351, 4 O.O.3d 485, 364 N.E.2d 286. However, in certain extraordinary circumstances, habeas corpus will lie even though jurisdiction is not an issue, but only where there is no adequate legal remedy, e.g., appeal or postconviction relief. State ex rel. Pirman v. Money (1994), 69 Ohio St.3d 591, 594-595, 635 N.E.2d 26, 29.

Luna’s petition…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Pirman v. MoneyOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Hammond v. DallmanOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  3. Stahl v. ShoemakerOhio Supreme Court · 1977
  4. State ex rel. Jackson v. AllenOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  5. Wilson v. RogersOhio Supreme Court · 1993

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Richard v. SeidnerOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  2. State ex rel. Wilcox v. SeidnerOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  3. McBroom v. RussellOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  4. State ex rel. Simpson v. LazaroffOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  5. State ex rel. Johnson v. TalikkaOhio Supreme Court · 1994

29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API