2014 Ohio 5696
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- Turner, pro se, filed a habeas corpus action to reinstate a $25,000 bond or secure his release from jail.
- Underlying case is State v. Turner, Cuyahoga C.P. No. CR-13-576006-A; Turner was initially bonded at $25,000.
- Postrelease-control violation led to a 200-day sentence and removal of Turner’s bond after a failure to appear.
- Upon completing the sentence in Oct. 2014, Turner moved to reinstate bond; the trial court had not ruled.
- Sheriff Bova is the proper respondent; the court dismissed Sutula and McGinty as respondents; the petition sought immediate bond reinstatement and release.
- The trial court denied summary judgment, granted the writ of habeas corpus, and ordered bond set forthwith, with costs on respondents.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Turner is entitled to habeas relief given an adequate remedy at law | Turner | sheriff argues adequate remedy under R.C. 2937.222 | Relief granted; habeas corpus appropriate; not precluded by remedy rule |
| Whether R.C. 2937.222 applies to this case | Turner’s charges do not trigger 2937.222 | 2937.222 may preclude habeas relief after a hearing | Not applicable; no proper 2937.222 hearing or applicability shown |
| Whether the petition satisfied pleading requirements for habeas corpus | Affidavits/attachments meet requirements | Petition not verified; filings insufficient | Notes that the Loc.App.R. 45 affidavit and docket show the bond revocation; form over substance avoided; petition facially fulfills requirements |
| Whether the respondents should be dismissed or proper respondent identified | Bova is proper respondent; Sutula and McGinty unnecessary | All named respondents challenged | Sheriff Bova proper; Sutula and McGinty dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Gentry, 7 Ohio App.3d 143, 454 N.E.2d 987 (6th Dist.1982) (right to reasonable bail; excessive bail unconstitutional)
- Lewis v. Telb, 26 Ohio App.3d 11, 497 N.E.2d 1376 (6th Dist.1985) (due process and bail considerations)
- Bland v. Holden, 21 Ohio St. 238, 257 N.E.2d 238 (Ohio 1970) (purpose of bail to secure attendance at trial)
- Stack v. Boyle, 342 U.S. 1, 72 S. Ct. 1, 96 L. Ed. 3 (Supreme Court 1951) (unreasonable bail violates constitutional guarantees; presumption of innocence)
- In re Lonardo, 86 Ohio App. 289, 89 N.E.2d 502 (8th Dist.1949) (right to bail before conviction)