State ex rel. Special Prosecutors v. Judges
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
Appellants contend that the denial by the Court of Appeals of the writ of prohibition was in error. The function of prohibition is to prevent an inferior tribunal from usurping or exercising jurisdiction with which it is not legally vested. State, ex rel. Ferrebee, v. Court of Appeals (1968), 14 Ohio St. 2d 109. The Court of Appeals, in the instant cause, expressed its reasoning for denying the writ as follows:
“We are asked to declare that the vacation of [the] plea was erroneous. We can not do this under this proceeding. The withdrawal and vacation of [a] plea is a fait accompli. Prohibition…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- State ex rel. Adams v. GusweilerOhio Supreme Court · 1972
- State ex rel. Northern Ohio Telephone Co. v. WinterOhio Supreme Court · 1970
- In Re KurtzhalzOhio Supreme Court · 1943
- Majnaric v. MajnaricOhio Court of Appeals · 1975
- Vavrina v. GreczanikOhio Court of Appeals · 1974
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by271 opinions
- Nolan v. NolanOhio Supreme Court · 1984
- State v. WilliamsOhio Court of Appeals · 1993
- In re MurrayOhio Supreme Court · 1990
- State v. KettererOhio Supreme Court · 2010
- State v. KettererOhio Supreme Court · 2010
266 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.