Anderson v. Maxwell
This text of 226 N.E.2d 103 (Anderson v. Maxwell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
In each of these actions in habeas corpus, the petitioner is being held pursuant to a judgment of conviction of a court of record which had jurisdiction to render the judgment. In each of these cases, the petitioner has sought and been denied relief under the postconviction statutes, and is seeking the same relief in habeas corpus.
The petitioners are remanded to custody on the authority of Freeman v. Maxwell, Warden, 4 Ohio St. 2d 4.
Petitioners remanded to custody.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
226 N.E.2d 103, 10 Ohio St. 2d 188, 39 Ohio Op. 2d 196, 1967 Ohio LEXIS 390, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/anderson-v-maxwell-ohio-1967.