From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

AUSTIN v. KNAB

Supreme Court of Ohio
Oct 19, 2010
2010 Ohio 4982 (Ohio 2010)

Opinion

No. 2010-1096.

Submitted October 13, 2010.

Decided October 19, 2010.

APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Ross County, No. 10CA3143.

Raymond Dean Austin, pro se.

Richard Cordray, Attorney General, and William H. Lamb, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.


{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the petition of appellant, Raymond Dean Austin, for a writ of habeas corpus to compel his release from prison. Austin's petition was fatally defective and subject to dismissal because he failed to comply with the verification requirement of R.C. 2725.04. Hughley v. Saunders, 123 Ohio St.3d 90, 2009-Ohio-4089, 914 N.E.2d 370, ¶ 1. Although Austin's petition contains several notarizations, there is no notarized statement in which he expressly swears to the truth of the allegations in the eight "grounds" listed in his petition. Id.; Chari v. Vore (2001), 91 Ohio St.3d 323, 327-328, 744 N.E.2d 763. Moreover, even if his petition were not fatally defective, he failed to state any meritorious claims that would warrant issuance of the requested extraordinary relief in habeas corpus. See, e.g., Turner v. Brunsman, 123 Ohio St.3d 445, 2009-Ohio-5588, 917 N.E.2d 269, ¶ 1 (claim of nonjurisdictional sentencing errors is not cognizable in habeas corpus); State ex rel. White v. Ohio Adult Parole Autk, 98 Ohio St.3d 290, 2003-Ohio-773, 783 N.E.2d 900, ¶ 3 (no inherent or constitutional right to be released before expiration of prison sentence).

Judgment affirmed.

BROWN, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O'CONNOR, O'DONNELL, LANZINGER, and CUPP, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

AUSTIN v. KNAB

Supreme Court of Ohio
Oct 19, 2010
2010 Ohio 4982 (Ohio 2010)
Case details for

AUSTIN v. KNAB

Case Details

Full title:THE STATE EX REL. AUSTIN, APPELLANT, v. KNAB, WARDEN, APPELLEE

Court:Supreme Court of Ohio

Date published: Oct 19, 2010

Citations

2010 Ohio 4982 (Ohio 2010)
2010 Ohio 4982

Citing Cases

Steele v. Shobert

Steele has failed to verify his petition with a sworn statement as mandated by R.C. 2725.04. State ex rel.…

State ex rel. Harsh v. Sheets

{¶ 3} Finally, Harsh's claims are not cognizable in habeas corpus, and he had an adequate remedy by way of…