Gamble v. Sacks

Ohio Supreme Court

Gamble v. Sacks

172 Ohio St. (N.S.) 60

Ohio Supreme Court·Decided March 15, 1961·No. No. 36776·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Petitioner had an adequate remedy by way of appeal from the judgment of conviction and sentence to review the alleged irregularities of which he complains and which he claims deprived him of his constitutional rights and cannot now have such a review by a proceeding in habeas corpus.

Petitioner remanded to custody.

Weygandt, C. J., Zimmerman, Tapt, Matthias, Bell, Herbert and O’Neill, JJ., concur.

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

Per Curiam.

Petitioner had an adequate remedy by way of appeal from the judgment of conviction and sentence to review the alleged irregularities of which he complains and which he claims deprived him of his constitutional rights and cannot now have such a review by a proceeding in habeas corpus.

Petitioner remanded to custody.

Weygandt, C. J., Zimmerman, Tapt, Matthias, Bell, Herbert and O’Neill, JJ., concur.

Gamble v. Sacks, 172 Ohio St. (N.S.) 60 (Ohio 1961).

Pincite

172 Ohio St. (N.S.) 60 (Gamble v. Sacks) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.