Kroger v. Engle

Ohio Supreme Court

Kroger v. Engle

373 N.E.2d 383, 53 Ohio St. 2d 165, 7 Ohio Op. 3d 316, 1978 Ohio LEXIS 508

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedMarch 15, 1978

DocketNo. 77-1294

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 373 N.E.2d 383 (Kroger v. Engle) 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.

Bluebook

Kroger v. Engle, 373 N.E.2d 383, 53 Ohio St. 2d 165, 7 Ohio Op. 3d 316, 1978 Ohio LEXIS 508 (Ohio 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This cause is before this court pursuant to an appeal as of right from the dismissal of appellant’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the Court of Appeals.

Appellant’s claim for entitlement to release from imprisonment, resulting from conviction for kidnapping, was based upon the assertion that the indictment of the grand jury was not signed by the foreman or deputy foreman.

The Court of Appeals properly found that the claim related to the sufficiency of the indictment. This court stated in Chapman v. Jago (1976), 48 Ohio St. 2d 51, that, “ [t]he question of the sufficiency of the indictment does not relate to the jurisdiction of the court to try appellant for the crime for which he was convicted. Mills v. Maxwell (1963), 174 Ohio St. 523. Appellant’s remedy, if any, is by way of appeal from the judgment of conviction.”

The judgment of the Court of Appeals is therefore affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

O’Neill, C. J., Herbert, Celebrezze, W. Brown, P. Brown, Sweeney and Locher, JJ., concur,

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