Opinion

Adams v. Humphreys

  • 27 Ohio St. 3d 43
  • 27 Ohio B. 456
  • 500 N.E.2d 1373
  • 1986 Ohio LEXIS 782
Court
Ohio Supreme Court
Filed
Nov 26, 1986
Status
Published
On the bench
Brown, Celebrezze, Douglas, Holmes, Locher, Sweeney, Wright
Cited by
16 cases
Authority
More cited than 82.9%

The opinion

Per Curiam.

While the facts here are sparse, leaving some doubt as to whether appellant’s conviction was the result of a trial or of a guilty plea, the dismissal of the habeas corpus action below was nonetheless proper because such action may not be used as a substitute for appeal. Stahl v. Shoemaker (1977), 50 Ohio St. 2d 351, 354 [4 O.O. 3d 485], and In re Piazza (1966), 7 Ohio St. 2d 102, 103 [36 O.O. 2d 84],

For reason of the foregoing, the judgment of the court of appeals is hereby affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Celebrezze, C.J., Sweeney, Locher, Holmes, C. Brown, Douglas and Wright, JJ., concur.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.