In re Bregman

Ohio Supreme Court

In re Bregman

167 Ohio St. (N.S.) 530

Ohio Supreme Court·Decided April 30, 1958·No. No. 35482·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The trial court had jurisdiction of the person of the petitioner and of the offenses with which he was charged and to which he pleaded guilty. Petitioner had an adequate remedy by way of appeal from the judgment of conviction to review the alleged errors of which he complains and cannot now have such a review by a proceeding in habeas corpus.

Petitioner remanded to custody.

Weygandt, C. J., Zimmerman, Stewart, Tapt, Matthias, Bell and Herbert, JJ., concur.

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

Per Curiam.

The trial court had jurisdiction of the person of the petitioner and of the offenses with which he was charged and to which he pleaded guilty. Petitioner had an adequate remedy by way of appeal from the judgment of conviction to review the alleged errors of which he complains and cannot now have such a review by a proceeding in habeas corpus.

Petitioner remanded to custody.

Weygandt, C. J., Zimmerman, Stewart, Tapt, Matthias, Bell and Herbert, JJ., concur.

In re Bregman, 167 Ohio St. (N.S.) 530 (Ohio 1958).

Pincite

167 Ohio St. (N.S.) 530 (In re Bregman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.