State ex rel. Earl v. Mitchell

Ohio Supreme Court

State ex rel. Earl v. Mitchell

1999 Ohio 54, 87 Ohio St. 3d 259

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedNovember 30, 1999

Docket1999-1262

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 1999 Ohio 54 (State ex rel. Earl v. Mitchell) 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

State ex rel. Earl v. Mitchell, 1999 Ohio 54, 87 Ohio St. 3d 259 (Ohio 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 87 Ohio St.3d 259.]

THE STATE EX REL. EARL, APPELLANT, v. MITCHELL, APPELLEE. [Cite as State ex rel. Earl v. Mitchell, 1999-Ohio-54.] Habeas corpus sought to compel Warden of Mansfield Correctional Institution to release relator from prison—Dismissal of petition affirmed. (No. 99-1262–Submitted November 3, 1999–Decided December 1, 1999.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Richland County, No. 99CA 40. __________________ {¶ 1} In 1991, the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas convicted appellant, Jonathan Earl, of four counts of rape and two counts of gross sexual imposition and sentenced him to an aggregate term of twenty-three to fifty years in prison. The court of appeals affirmed the judgment of the common pleas court. State v. Earl (June 24, 1993), Cuyahoga App. No. 62610, unreported, 1993 WL 227178. {¶ 2} In 1999, Earl filed a petition in the Court of Appeals for Richland County for a writ of habeas corpus to compel appellee, Mansfield Correctional Institution Warden Betty J. Mitchell, to release him from prison. Earl claimed that his convictions and sentence were void because his trial court had not complied with the jury-trial waiver requirements of R.C. 2945.05, i.e., his written waiver form had not been filed in his criminal case. The court of appeals dismissed the petition. {¶ 3} The cause is now before this court upon an appeal as of right. __________________ Jonathan Earl, pro se. Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General, and Laurence R. Snyder, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. __________________ SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

Per Curiam. {¶ 4} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals. A claimed violation of R.C. 2945.05 is not the proper subject for habeas corpus relief and may be remedied only in a direct appeal from a criminal conviction. Jackson v. Rose (1997), 79 Ohio St.3d 51, 679 N.E.2d 684, 685; State v. Pless (1996), 74 Ohio St.3d 333, 658 N.E.2d 766, paragraph two of the syllabus. Judgment affirmed. MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. __________________

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

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 87 Ohio St.3d 259.]

THE STATE EX REL. EARL, APPELLANT, v. MITCHELL, APPELLEE. [Cite as State ex rel. Earl v. Mitchell, 1999-Ohio-54.] Habeas corpus sought to compel Warden of Mansfield Correctional Institution to release relator from prison—Dismissal of petition affirmed. (No. 99-1262–Submitted November 3, 1999–Decided December 1, 1999.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Richland County, No. 99CA 40. __________________ {¶ 1} In 1991, the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas convicted appellant, Jonathan Earl, of four counts of rape and two counts of gross sexual imposition and sentenced him to an aggregate term of twenty-three to fifty years in prison. The court of appeals affirmed the judgment of the common pleas court. State v. Earl (June 24, 1993), Cuyahoga App. No. 62610, unreported, 1993 WL 227178. {¶ 2} In 1999, Earl filed a petition in the Court of Appeals for Richland County for a writ of habeas corpus to compel appellee, Mansfield Correctional Institution Warden Betty J. Mitchell, to release him from prison. Earl claimed that his convictions and sentence were void because his trial court had not complied with the jury-trial waiver requirements of R.C. 2945.05, i.e., his written waiver form had not been filed in his criminal case. The court of appeals dismissed the petition. {¶ 3} The cause is now before this court upon an appeal as of right. __________________ Jonathan Earl, pro se. Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General, and Laurence R. Snyder, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. __________________ SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

Per Curiam. {¶ 4} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals. A claimed violation of R.C. 2945.05 is not the proper subject for habeas corpus relief and may be remedied only in a direct appeal from a criminal conviction. Jackson v. Rose (1997), 79 Ohio St.3d 51, 679 N.E.2d 684, 685; State v. Pless (1996), 74 Ohio St.3d 333, 658 N.E.2d 766, paragraph two of the syllabus. Judgment affirmed. MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. __________________

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1999 Ohio 54, 87 Ohio St. 3d 259, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-earl-v-mitchell-ohio-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack