Home/Ohio Supreme Court/McDougald v. Brunsman

McDougald v. Brunsman

2011 Ohio 4607, 130 Ohio St. 3d 22
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedSeptember 15, 2011
Docket2011-0796
StatusPublished

This text of 2011 Ohio 4607 (McDougald v. Brunsman) 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
McDougald v. Brunsman, 2011 Ohio 4607, 130 Ohio St. 3d 22 (Ohio 2011).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the petition of appellant, Jerone McDougald, for a writ of habeas corpus. His claims are not cognizable in habeas corpus. See Pishok v. Kelly, 122 Ohio St.3d 292, 2009-Ohio-3452, 910 N.E.2d 1033 (validity or sufficiency of charging instrument); Junius v. Eberlin, 122 Ohio St.3d 53, 2009-Ohio-2383, 907 N.E.2d 1179 (actual innocence); Keith v. Bobby, 117 Ohio St.3d 470, 2008-Ohio-1443, 884 N.E.2d 1067, ¶ 15 (fraud upon the court, prosecutorial misconduct, and perjured testimony).

Judgment affirmed.

O’Connor, C.J., and Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, Cupp, and McGee Brown, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Pishok v. Kelly
2009 Ohio 3452 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2009)
Junius v. Eberlin
2009 Ohio 2383 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2009)
Keith v. Bobby
884 N.E.2d 1067 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2011 Ohio 4607, 130 Ohio St. 3d 22, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcdougald-v-brunsman-ohio-2011.