Baker v. Sacks

172 Ohio St. (N.S.) 340

Ohio Supreme Court·Decided June 14, 1961·No. No. 36913·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Habeas corpus cannot be used to review alleged irregularities in the resentencing of an accused by a court of competent jurisdiction. Ex parte Shaw, 7 Ohio St., 81; Ex parte Hagan, 25 Ohio St., 426.

Petitioner remanded to custody.

Weygandt, C. J., Zimmerman, Matthias, Bell, Radcliee and O’Neill, JJ., concur. Radcliee, J., of the Fourth Appellate District, sitting by designation in the place and stead of Herbert, J.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

Petitioner remanded to custody.

Weygandt, C. J., Zimmerman, Matthias, Bell, Radcliee and O’Neill, JJ., concur. Radcliee, J., of the Fourth Appellate District, sitting by designation in the place and stead of Herbert, J.

Baker v. Sacks, 172 Ohio St. (N.S.) 340 (Ohio 1961).

Pincite

172 Ohio St. (N.S.) 340 (Baker v. Sacks) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.