Mitchell v. Smith
898 N.E.2d 47
Ohio2008Check Treatment{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the petition of appellant, Ervin L. Mitchell, for a writ of habeas corpus because a claimed violation of Crim.R. 32(C) does not entitle an inmate to immediate release from prison. Instead, if a violation is established, “the appropriate remedy is resentencing instead of outright release.” McAllister v. Smith,
Judgment affirmed.
Notes
. We deny Mitchell’s motion for oral argument.
