State ex rel. Cutis v. Bunting (Slip Opinion)
149 Ohio St. 3d 123
Ohio2016Background
- Richard Curtis was convicted in 2009 of the 1996 aggravated murder of his wife and his conviction was affirmed on direct appeal.
- The original death certificate listed cause as a contact gunshot to the head and manner as "could not be determined," with time of death as "morning."
- In 2001 the Brown County coroner filed an addendum changing the manner of death to "homicide." In 2008 the coroner reexamined the case and narrowed the estimated time of death to between 2:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m.
- In October 2015 Curtis filed a habeas corpus petition claiming his conviction was obtained by prosecutorial misconduct, fraud, and perjured testimony tied to the coroner’s amendments to the death certificate, arguing the trial court therefore lacked jurisdiction.
- The Third District dismissed the habeas petition; the Supreme Court of Ohio affirmed, holding Curtis’s claims were not cognizable in habeas and raised matters for direct appeal rather than jurisdictional defects.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the coroner’s amendments to the death certificate deprived the trial court of jurisdiction | Curtis: coroner lacked authority to amend death certificate or narrow time of death, so court lacked jurisdiction to convict | State: common pleas courts have original jurisdiction over crimes; coroner’s actions, even if improper, do not eliminate trial-court jurisdiction | Held: No jurisdictional defect; coroner’s conduct was evidentiary, not jurisdictional |
| Whether prosecutorial misconduct/perjury claims can be raised in habeas | Curtis: misconduct/perjury rendered conviction unlawful and habeas is appropriate | State: such claims are not cognizable in habeas and should be raised on direct appeal | Held: Claims of prosecutorial misconduct and perjury are not cognizable in habeas corpus |
| Whether habeas is available despite alternative remedies | Curtis: contends habeas proper because conviction obtained by fraud | State: habeas unavailable where adequate remedy exists unless judgment is void for lack of jurisdiction | Held: No void judgment for lack of jurisdiction, so habeas unavailable |
| Whether Dunning v. Varnau (common pleas decision) undermines conviction | Curtis: Dunning supports that coroner lacked authority to change verdicts, nullifying evidence used against him | State: Even if Dunning were correct, it affects evidentiary sufficiency or error on appeal, not jurisdiction | Held: Dunning (even if valid) would not convert these claims into a jurisdictional defect |
Key Cases Cited
- Leyman v. Bradshaw, 146 Ohio St.3d 522 (2016) (extraordinary writs, including habeas, unavailable when adequate legal remedy exists; narrow jurisdictional exception)
- In re Complaint for Writ of Habeas Corpus for Goeller, 103 Ohio St.3d 427 (2004) (habeas unavailable when ordinary remedies suffice)
- Gaskins v. Shiplevy, 74 Ohio St.3d 149 (1995) (habeas may address judgments void for lack of jurisdiction)
- Williamson v. Williams, 103 Ohio St.3d 25 (2004) (prosecutorial-misconduct and perjury claims are not cognizable in habeas corpus)