Bradford v. Moore
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals because a “claimed violation of R.C. 2945.05 is not the proper subject for habeas corpus relief and may be remedied only in a direct appeal from a criminal conviction.” State ex rel. Earl v. Mitchell (1999), 87 Ohio St.3d 259, 260, 719 N.E.2d 545, 546; State v. Pless (1996), 74 Ohio St.3d 333, 658 N.E.2d 766, paragraph two of the syllabus.
Judgment affirmed.
Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
2Cases cited2 opinions
- State v. PlessOhio Supreme Court · 1996
- State ex rel. Earl v. MitchellOhio Supreme Court · 1999
3Cited by3 opinions
- State ex rel. Stovall v. JonesOhio Supreme Court · 2001
- Bradford v. MooreOhio Supreme Court · 2000
- State ex rel. Stovall v. JonesOhio Supreme Court · 2001