Home/Ohio Supreme Court/In re Floto

In re Floto

89 Ohio St. (N.S.) 446
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided January 6, 1914·No. No. 14469·Published

Opinion

The application for a writ of habeas corpus is hereby denied [447]*447for the reason that it appears from the petition and application for the writ that the said Charles A. Floto is not unlawfully deprived of his liberty and no constitutional right of the petitioner has been invaded.

Nichols, C. J., Shauck, Johnson, Donahue, Wanamaker, Newman and Wilkin, JJ., concur.

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

In re Floto, 89 Ohio St. (N.S.) 446 (Ohio 1914).

89 Ohio St. (N.S.) 446 (In re Floto) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.