Briseno v. Cook
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the habeas corpus petition of appellant, Antonio Briseno. Appellant had an adequate remedy by way of direct appeal from his sentence to raise his claim that he did not receive proper notification about postrelease control at his sentencing hearing. Patterson v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth., 120 Ohio St.3d 311, 2008-Ohio-6147, 898 N.E.2d 950, ¶ 8; Watkins v. Collins, 111 Ohio St.3d 425, 2006-Ohio-5082, 857 N.E.2d 78, ¶ 45 and 53.
Judgment affirmed.
Moyer, C.J., and Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, and Cupp,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Watkins v. CollinsOhio Supreme Court · 2006
- Patterson v. Ohio Adult Parole AuthorityOhio Supreme Court · 2008
3Cited by7 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Castro v. CorriganOhio Supreme Court · 2011
- State ex rel. Castro v. CorriganOhio Supreme Court · 2011
- State ex rel. Tucker v. ForchioneOhio Supreme Court · 2010
- State ex rel. Thomas v. DeWineOhio Supreme Court · 2010
- State Ex Rel. Martin v. Ohio Adult Parole AuthorityOhio Supreme Court · 2010
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.