midpage

Adams v. HumphreysAdams v. Humphreys

Ohio Supreme Court
Nov 26, 1986
No. 85-2008
Versions:27 Ohio St. 3d 43
500 N.E.2d 1373
27 Ohio B. 456
1986 Ohio LEXIS 782
Per Curiam.

While the facts here are sparse, leaving some doubt as to whether appellant’s conviction was the result of a trial or of a guilty plea, the dismissal of the habeas corpus action below was nonetheless proper because such action may not be used as a substitute for appeal. Stahl v. Shoemaker (1977), 50 Ohio St. 2d 351, 354 [4 O.O. 3d 485], and In re Piazza (1966), 7 Ohio St. 2d 102, 103 [36 O.O. 2d 84],

For reason of the foregoing, the judgment of the court of appeals is hereby affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Celebrezze, C.J., Sweeney, Locher, Holmes, C. Brown, Douglas and Wright, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Adams v. Humphreys
Court Name: Ohio Supreme Court
Date Published: Nov 26, 1986
Citations: 27 Ohio St. 3d 43; 500 N.E.2d 1373; 27 Ohio B. 456; 1986 Ohio LEXIS 782; No. 85-2008
Docket Number: No. 85-2008
Court Abbreviation: Ohio
Log In