Thomas v. Collins
This text of 659 N.E.2d 790 (Thomas v. Collins) 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.
Opinion
Whether the evidence conforms to the indictment is not a jurisdictional issue as contended by petitioner-appellant. However, habeas corpus relief may be granted for nonjurisdictional claims, if the petitioner has no adequate remedy at law. State ex rel. Firman v. Money (1993), 69 Ohio St.3d [414]*414591, 593, 635 N.E.2d 26, 29. Issues involving the relationship of the indictment to the evidence may clearly be appealed. See State v. O’Brien (1987), 30 Ohio St.3d 122, 30 OBR 436, 508 N.E.2d 144. Thus, petitioner in this case had an adequate remedy at law.
Accordingly, we overrule the motion to strike or dismiss and affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
659 N.E.2d 790, 74 Ohio St. 3d 413, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thomas-v-collins-ohio-1996.