Legal Opinion
Rodgers v. Capots
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided October 6, 1993No. 92-1724PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Per curiam
Habeas corpus is not the proper remedy to address every concern a prisoner has about his legal rights or status. R.C. 2725.05 states:
“If it appears that a person alleged to be restrained of his liberty is in the custody of an officer under process issued by a court or magistrate, or by virtue of the judgment or order of a court of record, and that the court or magistrate had jurisdiction to issue the process, render the judgment, or make the order, the writ of habeas corpus shall not be allowed. If the jurisdiction appears after the writ is allowed, the person shall not be discharged by…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Stahl v. ShoemakerOhio Supreme Court · 1977
- Bobby Brewer v. Eric G. DahlbergCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1991
3Cited by13 opinions
- State ex rel. Smirnoff v. GreeneOhio Supreme Court · 1998
- Hattie v. AndersonOhio Supreme Court · 1994
- State v. GambleOhio Court of Appeals · 2021
- Daniel v. StateOhio Supreme Court · 2003
- Ridenour v. RandleOhio Supreme Court · 2002
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.