From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Schneider v. Clipper

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, Cuyahoga County
Jul 21, 2010
2010 Ohio 3427 (Ohio Ct. App. 2010)

Opinion

No. 95208.

RELEASE DATE: July 21, 2010.

Writ of Habeas Corpus, Motion Nos. 435705 and 435783, Order No. 435827.

PETITION DENIED.

Joanne Schneider, pro se, Inmate #74646, for Petitioner.

Diane Mallory, Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Justice Section, Attorney for Respondent.

BEFORE: Rocco, P.J., Kilbane, J., and McMonagle, J.


JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION


{¶ 1} Joanne Schneider has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Schneider seeks postconviction bail in State v. Schneider, Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case No. CR-05-473739-B. For the following reasons, we decline to issue Schneider a writ of habeas corpus.

{¶ 2} This court, in State v. Schneider, Cuyahoga App. No. 93128, 2010-Ohio-2089, reversed the sentence imposed upon Schneider, with regard to count one, and remanded the appeal to the trial court solely for re-sentencing. Schneider's original conviction, for the offenses of engaging in a pattern of corrupt activity, securities fraud, false representation in the sale of a security, sale of unregistered securities, theft, and money laundering, remains in effect without alteration. Schneider seeks postconviction bail following reversal on count one and the order of re-sentencing. Habeas corpus is the proper action to seek postconviction bail. Brown v. Rogers (1995), 71 Ohio St.3d 570, 645 N.E.2d 124. However, habeas corpus will lie only where there exists no other legal remedy. State ex rel. Pirman v. Money (1994), 69 Ohio St.3d 591, 635 N.E.2d 26. In the case sub judice, Schneider has availed herself of an adequate legal remedy that prevents this court from granting her petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Schneider has filed a "motion for immediate release from state custody and reinstatement of pre-trial bond," a "motion for decision on state's unopposed motion to vacate and reinstatement of bond Crim. R. 46," and an "application for contiunuaction (sic) of bond pending appeal Crim. R. 46." Each of the aforesaid motions for postconviction bail remain pending with the trial court.

{¶ 3} Accordingly, Schneider's request for a writ of habeas corpus is premature. Schneider possesses an adequate remedy at law by way of application to the trial court or the court of appeals vis-a-vis postconviction bail. It is further ordered that the Clerk of the Eighth District Court of Appeals serve notice of this judgment upon all parties as mandated by Civ. R. 58(B).

Petition denied.

MARY EILEEN KILBANE, J. and CHRISTINE T. McMONAGLE, J., CONCUR.


Summaries of

Schneider v. Clipper

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, Cuyahoga County
Jul 21, 2010
2010 Ohio 3427 (Ohio Ct. App. 2010)
Case details for

Schneider v. Clipper

Case Details

Full title:Joanne Schneider, Petitioner, v. Warden Kimberly Clipper, Respondent

Court:Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, Cuyahoga County

Date published: Jul 21, 2010

Citations

2010 Ohio 3427 (Ohio Ct. App. 2010)