Legal Opinion

Thornton v. Russell

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 10, 1998No. 97-2378PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Per curiam

Thornton asserts in his propositions of law that the court of appeals erred in dismissing his habeas corpus petition. Thornton’s assertions, however, are meritless for the following reasons.

First, any defect in the criminal complaint filed in municipal court is not cognizable in habeas corpus because Thornton was never convicted and sentenced on the complaint. Instead, the criminal complaint was dismissed, and Thornton was convicted and sentenced upon the indictment. See, e.g., State v. Wac (1981), 68 Ohio St.2d 84, 87, 22 O.O.3d 299, 301, 428 N.E.2d 428, 431, fn. 2 (Any flaw in criminal…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State v. WacOhio Supreme Court · 1981
  2. State ex rel. Beaucamp v. LazaroffOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  3. VanBuskirk v. WingardOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Leal v. MohrOhio Supreme Court · 1997

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Beaver v. KontehOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  2. Russell v. MitchellOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  3. Matchmaker International Inc. v. LongOhio Court of Appeals · 1995
  4. Shie v. LeonardOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  5. State ex rel. Jackson v. BriganoOhio Supreme Court · 2000

14 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