HEDDLESTON, APPELLANT, v. MACK, WARDEN, APPELLEE.
No. 98-1679
Supreme Court of Ohio
Submitted December 2, 1998-Decided December 30, 1998
[Cite as Heddleston v. Mack (1998), 84 Ohio St.3d 213.]
Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General, and Diane Mallory, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Per Curiam. Heddleston asserts that the court of appeals erred in dismissing his habeas corpus petition. For the reasons that follow, however, Heddleston‘s contention lacks merit.
First, Heddleston had adequate remedies by appeal or postconviction relief to review his claims of sentencing error, because these claims are not jurisdictional. Smith v. Walker (1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 431, 432, 700 N.E.2d 592, 592.
Second, the fact that Heddleston may have already invoked an alternate remedy, i.e., a motion to correct jail-time credit, does not entitle him to extraordinary relief to relitigate the issue. State ex rel. Sampson v. Parrott (1998), 82 Ohio St.3d 92, 93, 694 N.E.2d 463.
Based on the foregoing, the court of appeals properly dismissed Heddleston‘s habeas corpus petition. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.
Judgment affirmed.
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur.
