From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Huffines

Supreme Court of Ohio
May 18, 1960
167 N.E.2d 352 (Ohio 1960)

Opinion

No. 36305

Decided May 18, 1960.

Habeas corpus — Not available as substitute for adequate remedy by appeal.

IN HABEAS CORPUS.

The petitioner, who seeks his release from the Ohio Penitentiary by this habeas corpus proceeding instituted in this court, was indicted on three counts. On arraignment he pleaded not guilty but later withdrew that plea and pleaded guilty to count No. 1 of the indictment and was sentenced for an indefinite term to the penitentiary where he is now confined.

Petitioner claims as grounds for his release that there was no legal charge in the indictment, that he was denied a constitutional right when he was sentenced after a plea of guilty to one of three counts, and that the sentence for an indefinite term is not legal.

Mr. Donald Huffines, in propria persona. Mr. Mark McElroy, attorney general, and Mr. Aubrey Wendt, for respondent.


A legal charge was stated in the indictment. Petitioner had an adequate remedy by way of appeal from the judgment of conviction to review the other alleged errors or irregularities of which he here complains and cannot now have such a review by a proceeding in habeas corpus.

Petitioner remanded to custody.

WEYGANDT, C.J., ZIMMERMAN, TAFT, MATTHIAS, BELL, HERBERT and PECK, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

In re Huffines

Supreme Court of Ohio
May 18, 1960
167 N.E.2d 352 (Ohio 1960)
Case details for

In re Huffines

Case Details

Full title:IN RE HUFFINES

Court:Supreme Court of Ohio

Date published: May 18, 1960

Citations

167 N.E.2d 352 (Ohio 1960)
167 N.E.2d 352

Citing Cases

Wise v. Urban Industries of Ohio, Inc.

{¶ 7} Wise maintains that because a settlement agreement acts as a waiver of participation in the workers'…