Summary
In Beard v. Alvis, 164 Ohio St. 488, 132 N.E.2d 96, the Ohio Court held that the claim of denial of due process because of ineffective and inadequate representation by court appointed counsel was not an allegation of fact entitling one to release on habeas corpus.
Summary of this case from Phillips v. StateOpinion
No. 34472
Decided February 1, 1956.
Habeas corpus — To obtain release from penal institution — Due process — Facts alleged in petition insufficient to warrant relief.
IN HABEAS CORPUS.
Petitioner has invoked the original jurisdiction of this court by a petition in habeas corpus to obtain his release from incarceration in the Ohio Penitentiary. He was indicted for first degree murder, tried and found guilty as charged, without the jury's recommendation of mercy. A motion for a new trial was granted, petitioner retracted his plea of not guilty and entered a plea of guilty, and was sentenced to life imprisonment.
Mr. Joseph Ralston, for petitioner.
Mr. C. William O'Neill, attorney general, and Mr. Roger B. Turrell, for respondent.
Petitioner bases his right to release on the sole claim that he was denied a fair trial because of the ineffective and inadequate representation by counsel appointed by the court, and that, therefore, he was denied due process of law under the Fourteenth Amendment to the federal Constitution.
There is no question as to the trial court's jurisdiction of the subject matter and the person of petitioner.
The petition contains no allegation of fact which entitles petitioner to the relief sought. The relief prayed for is denied.
Petitioner remanded to custody.
WEYGANDT, C.J., MATTHIAS, HART, ZIMMERMAN, STEWART and BELL, JJ., concur.