Legal Opinion

Prather v. Brigano

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided September 29, 1999No. 99-539PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Per curiam

The court of appeals did not err in dismissing Prather’s habeas corpus petition. Prather’s speedy-trial claim is not cognizable in habeas corpus. State ex rel. Brantley v. Ghee (1997), 80 Ohio St.3d 287, 288, 685 N.E.2d 1243, 1244. In addition, Prather did not attach his commitment papers to his petition. Tucker v. McAninch (1998), 82 Ohio St.3d 423, 696 N.E.2d 595, 596. Based on the foregoing, we affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.

Judgment affirmed.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Brantley v. GheeOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Tucker v. McAninchOhio Supreme Court · 1998

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Prather v. BriganoOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Clarke v. McFaul, 89436 (4-5-2007)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2007
  3. Moore v. Kochevar, Unpublished Decision (5-25-2004)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2004
  4. Hopkins v. State, 89647 (4-16-2007)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2007
  5. In Re Peterson, 07-Ma-56 (4-5-2007)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2007

2 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