Legal Opinion

Dapice v. Stickrath

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 30, 1988No. 88-1821PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Per curiam

Respondent moves to dismiss because petitioner is lawfully confined by judgment and does not attack the jurisdiction of the court that rendered the judgment. Stahl v. Shoemaker (1977), 50 Ohio St. 2d 351, 4 O.O. 3d 485, 364 N.E. 2d 286; R.C. 2725.05. For the following reasons, we grant the motion.

This court has not previously addressed, in this type of case, the prohibition against issuing the writ when the petitioner is in custody under process, judgment, or order of a court of record that had jurisdiction to issue the process, judgment, or order.1 However, in Coleman v. Stobbs (1986), 23…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Stahl v. ShoemakerOhio Supreme Court · 1977
  2. State ex rel. Sawyer v. O'ConnorOhio Supreme Court · 1978
  3. Coleman v. McGettrickOhio Supreme Court · 1965
  4. Coleman v. StobbsOhio Supreme Court · 1986
  5. State ex rel. Martin v. CorriganOhio Supreme Court · 1986

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Pirman v. MoneyOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Brown v. RogersOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Jenkins v. BillyOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  4. State ex rel. Silcott v. SpahrOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  5. Lessin v. McFaulOhio Supreme Court · 1992

6 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