State ex rel. Tucker v. Rogers

607 N.E.2d 461, 66 Ohio St. 3d 36
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided February 24, 1993·No. No. 92-1710·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We affirm the decision of the court of appeals. In In re Hunt (1976), 46 Ohio St.2d 378, 75 O.O.2d 450, 348 N.E.2d 727, paragraph two of the syllabus, we held that “[a] writ of habeas corpus will ordinarily be denied where there is an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law.” An order revoking probation and imposing sentence is a final, appealable order from which an appeal is routinely taken. See, e.g., State v. McMullen (1983), 6 Ohio St.3d 244, 6 OBR 312, 452 N.E.2d 1292; State v. Walden (1988), 54 Ohio App.3d 160, 561 N.E.2d 995.

Accordingly, the decision of the court of appeals is affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Moyer, C.J., A.W. Sweeney, Douglas, Wright, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur.

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

State ex rel. Tucker v. Rogers, 607 N.E.2d 461, 66 Ohio St. 3d 36 (Ohio 1993).

607 N.E.2d 461 (State ex rel. Tucker v. Rogers) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Perry v. State, Unpublished Decision (10-12-2007)
2007 Ohio 5540 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2007)
Coe v. McFaul, 89749 (5-1-2007)
2007 Ohio 2104 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2007)
State v. Russell, 89639 (4-4-2007)
2007 Ohio 1589 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2007)
State ex rel. Gadsden v. Lioi
2001 Ohio 1611 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2001)