State ex rel. Slaughter v. Foley (Slip Opinion)
2021 Ohio 4049
| Ohio | 2021Background
- In Jan. 1993 Slaughter pleaded guilty to aggravated murder (with capital specification) and was sentenced to life with parole eligibility after 30 years; he also pleaded guilty to aggravated robbery (10–25 years) and has served that term.
- In July 2020 Slaughter filed a habeas corpus petition seeking immediate release, arguing the murder sentence was unlawful under the law then in effect and that he should instead have received a 30-year definite term.
- The Ninth District Court of Appeals granted the warden’s motion to dismiss the habeas petition.
- The court held Slaughter’s sentence was voidable rather than void, so habeas corpus was not an appropriate remedy because an adequate remedy by direct appeal exists.
- The Supreme Court of Ohio affirmed, applying its decision in State v. Henderson and related precedent.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a statutorily unauthorized sentence imposed by a court that otherwise has jurisdiction can be challenged in habeas corpus | Slaughter: sentence exceeded court's statutory authority and is invalid, so confinement is unlawful and habeas should order immediate release | Warden: sentence is an error in exercise of jurisdiction (voidable), not a jurisdictional defect; habeas is improper because direct appeal is adequate | Held: If court has jurisdiction, such sentencing error is voidable, not void; habeas unavailable |
| Whether the petitioner has an adequate remedy at law | Slaughter: seeks immediate release via habeas | Warden: petitioner has adequate remedy by direct appeal or other postconviction proceedings | Held: Direct appeal (or other adequate remedies) is available; habeas dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Henderson, 161 Ohio St.3d 285, 162 N.E.3d 776 (2020) (holds sentencing errors by a court with jurisdiction are voidable, not void)
- Kelley v. Wilson, 103 Ohio St.3d 201, 814 N.E.2d 1222 (2004) (habeas unavailable where adequate remedy by direct appeal exists)
- Johnson v. Timmerman-Cooper, 93 Ohio St.3d 614, 757 N.E.2d 1153 (2001) (describes habeas as remedy for unlawful restraint when no adequate legal remedy exists)
- State ex rel. Jackson v. McFaul, 73 Ohio St.3d 185, 652 N.E.2d 746 (1995) (habeas relief requires entitlement to immediate release)
- Clark v. Connor, 82 Ohio St.3d 309, 695 N.E.2d 751 (1998) (standard for Civ.R. 12(B)(6) dismissal and construing pleadings for dismissal)