State v. Edsall

Ohio Supreme Court

State v. Edsall

269 N.E.2d 848, 26 Ohio St. 2d 145, 55 Ohio Op. 2d 276, 1971 Ohio LEXIS 503

Ohio Supreme Court·Decided May 19, 1971·No. No. 70-594·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Habeas corpus tests only the jurisdiction of the sentencing court. In this ease, the J\ivenile [146] Court had jurisdiction of the subject matter and the person of appellant. Accordingly, its original order of commitment, as well as its subsequent order of July 9, 1970, committing appellant to the detention home for 30 days, were valid and lawful orders by a court of competent jurisdiction. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is, therefore, affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

O’Neill, C. J., Schneider, Herbert, Duncan, Corrigan, Stern and Leach, JJ., concur.

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

Per Curiam.

Habeas corpus tests only the jurisdiction of the sentencing court. In this ease, the J\ivenile [146] Court had jurisdiction of the subject matter and the person of appellant. Accordingly, its original order of commitment, as well as its subsequent order of July 9, 1970, committing appellant to the detention home for 30 days, were valid and lawful orders by a court of competent jurisdiction. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is, therefore, affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

O’Neill, C. J., Schneider, Herbert, Duncan, Corrigan, Stern and Leach, JJ., concur.

State v. Edsall, 269 N.E.2d 848, 26 Ohio St. 2d 145, 55 Ohio Op. 2d 276, 1971 Ohio LEXIS 503 (Ohio 1971).

Pincite

269 N.E.2d 848 (State v. Edsall) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related