History
  • No items yet
midpage
Kroger v. Engle
53 Ohio St. 2d 165
Ohio
1978
Check Treatment
Per Curiam.

This cause is before this court pursuant to an appeal as of right from the dismissal of appellant’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the Court of Appeals.

Appellant’s claim for entitlement to release from imprisonment, resulting from conviction for kidnapping, was based upon the assertion that the indictment of the grand jury was not signed by the foreman or deputy foreman.

The Court of Appeals properly found that the claim related to the sufficiency of the indictment. This court stated in Chapman v. Jago (1976), 48 Ohio St. 2d 51, that, “ [t]he question of the sufficiency of the indictment does not relate to the jurisdiction of the court to try appellant for the crime for which he was convicted. Mills v. Maxwell (1963), 174 Ohio St. 523. Appellant’s remedy, if any, is by way of appeal from the judgment of conviction.”

The judgment of the Court of Appeals is therefore affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

O’Neill, C. J., Herbert, Celebrezze, W. Brown, P. Brown, Sweeney and Locher, JJ., concur,

Case Details

Case Name: Kroger v. Engle
Court Name: Ohio Supreme Court
Date Published: Mar 15, 1978
Citation: 53 Ohio St. 2d 165
Docket Number: No. 77-1294
Court Abbreviation: Ohio
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.