Pishok v. Kelly

2009 Ohio 3452, 910 N.E.2d 1033, 122 Ohio St. 3d 292
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 21, 2009
Docket2009-0342
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 2009 Ohio 3452 (Pishok v. Kelly) 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
Pishok v. Kelly, 2009 Ohio 3452, 910 N.E.2d 1033, 122 Ohio St. 3d 292 (Ohio 2009).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the petition for a writ of habeas corpus of appellant, David J. Pishok. Habeas corpus is not available to challenge the validity or sufficiency of a charging instrument. McCuller v. Hudson, 121 Ohio St.3d 168, 2009-Ohio-721, 902 N.E.2d 979, ¶ 1. Following Pishok’s conviction and sentence for crimes charged in the indictment, the judgment bound him, and he had an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law by appeal to raise his claim that the indictment was defective. Monroe v. Jackson, 119 Ohio St.3d 344, 2008-Ohio-4480, 894 N.E.2d 43, ¶ 4.

Judgment affirmed.

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

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

Related

McDougald v. Brunsman
2011 Ohio 4607 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2011)
State ex rel. Bandarapalli v. Gallagher
2011 Ohio 230 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2011)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2009 Ohio 3452, 910 N.E.2d 1033, 122 Ohio St. 3d 292, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pishok-v-kelly-ohio-2009.