Turner v. Brunsman

2009 Ohio 5588, 917 N.E.2d 269, 123 Ohio St. 3d 445
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 28, 2009
Docket2009-1129
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 2009 Ohio 5588 (Turner v. Brunsman) 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
Turner v. Brunsman, 2009 Ohio 5588, 917 N.E.2d 269, 123 Ohio St. 3d 445 (Ohio 2009).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the petition of appellant, Donald Turner, for a writ of habeas corpus. Turner’s claim of nonjurisdictional sentencing errors is not cognizable in habeas corpus. See, e.g., Dunn v. Smith, 119 Ohio St.3d 364, 2008-Ohio-4565, 894 N.E.2d 312, ¶ 10. If, as Turner claims, the trial court refuses to issue a revised sentencing entry, he may compel the court to act through an action for a writ of mandamus or a writ of procedendo. Id. at ¶ 9.

Judgment affirmed.

Moyer, C.J., and Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, and Cupp, JJ., concur.

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

Related

State ex rel. Turner v. Corrigan
29 N.E.3d 962 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2015)
Roberts v. Knab
2012 Ohio 56 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2012)
State ex rel. Austin v. Knab
2010 Ohio 4982 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2009 Ohio 5588, 917 N.E.2d 269, 123 Ohio St. 3d 445, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/turner-v-brunsman-ohio-2009.