State ex rel. Quillen v. Warden

2012 Ohio 4299, 976 N.E.2d 898, 133 Ohio St. 3d 161
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedSeptember 25, 2012
Docket2012-0811
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 2012 Ohio 4299 (State ex rel. Quillen v. Warden) 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. Quillen v. Warden, 2012 Ohio 4299, 976 N.E.2d 898, 133 Ohio St. 3d 161 (Ohio 2012).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

*162 Terrance Quillen, pro se. Michael DeWine, Attorney General, and M. Scott Criss, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals denying the writ of habeas corpus requested by appellant, Terrance Quillen. His June 2001 sentencing entry “sufficiently included language that postrelease control was part of his sentence so as to afford him sufficient notice to raise any claimed errors on appeal rather than by extraordinary writ.” State ex rel. Pruitt v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas, 125 Ohio St.3d 402, 2010-Ohio-1808, 928 N.E.2d 722, ¶ 4; McGee v. Sheldon, 132 Ohio St.3d 89, 2012-Ohio-2217, 969 N.E.2d 262, ¶ 1. The sentencing entry “constituted a final, appealable order, and he had an adequate remedy by way of appeal to raise his claims.” State ex rel. Castro v. Corrigan, 129 Ohio St.3d 342, 2011-Ohio-4059, 952 N.E.2d 497, ¶ 3.

Judgment affirmed.

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

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

Related

State v. Smith
2012 Ohio 5965 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2012 Ohio 4299, 976 N.E.2d 898, 133 Ohio St. 3d 161, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-quillen-v-warden-ohio-2012.