Legal Opinion

Anderson v. Maxwell

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided May 3, 1967No. Nos. 40586, 40611, 40617, 40785, 40786, 40824, 40825, 40860 and 40874PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Per curiam

In each of these actions in habeas corpus, the petitioner is being held pursuant to a judgment of conviction of a court of record which had jurisdiction to render the judgment. In each of these cases, the petitioner has sought and been denied relief under the postconviction statutes, and is seeking the same relief in habeas corpus.

The petitioners are remanded to custody on the authority of Freeman v. Maxwell, Warden, 4 Ohio St. 2d 4.

Petitioners remanded to custody.

Taet, C. J., Zimmerman, Matthias, O’Neill, Herbert, Schneider and Brown, JJ., concur.

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Freeman v. MaxwellOhio Supreme Court · 1965

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Stahl v. ShoemakerOhio Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Blackburn v. JagoOhio Supreme Court · 1988
  3. In re CopleyOhio Supreme Court · 1972
  4. State ex rel. Burch v. MorrisOhio Supreme Court · 1986
  5. Knox v. MaxwellDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1967

1 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