Rigg v. Correction Department

Ohio Supreme Court

Rigg v. Correction Department

170 Ohio St. (N.S.) 347

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedFebruary 24, 1960

DocketNo. 36148

StatusPublished

This text of 170 Ohio St. (N.S.) 347 (Rigg v. Correction Department) 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

Rigg v. Correction Department, 170 Ohio St. (N.S.) 347 (Ohio 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The period from March 1950, when petitioner was declared a parole violator, to October 1955, when he was released from the Indiana State Prison, at wMch time he was restored to parole by respondent, cannot be counted as time toward the serving of Ms maximum sentence. Section 2965.21, Revised Code.

The action of the Pardon and Parole Commission in declaring petitioner to be a parole violator before the expiration of the maximum period of his sentence and before Ms final release by that commission is not reviewable in a habeas corpus [349]*349proceeding, even though petitioner has been returned to the penitentiary because of such action. In re Varner, 166 Ohio St., 340.

Petitioner remanded to custody.

Weygandt, C. J., Zimmerman, Taet, Matthias, Bell, Herbert and Peck, JJ., concur.

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

Per Curiam.

The period from March 1950, when petitioner was declared a parole violator, to October 1955, when he was released from the Indiana State Prison, at wMch time he was restored to parole by respondent, cannot be counted as time toward the serving of Ms maximum sentence. Section 2965.21, Revised Code.

The action of the Pardon and Parole Commission in declaring petitioner to be a parole violator before the expiration of the maximum period of his sentence and before Ms final release by that commission is not reviewable in a habeas corpus [349]*349proceeding, even though petitioner has been returned to the penitentiary because of such action. In re Varner, 166 Ohio St., 340.

Petitioner remanded to custody.

Weygandt, C. J., Zimmerman, Taet, Matthias, Bell, Herbert and Peck, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

170 Ohio St. (N.S.) 347, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rigg-v-correction-department-ohio-1960.