Summary
In Simpson v. Maxwell (1964), 1 Ohio St.2d 71, 72, 203 N.E.2d 324, 3243-25, the Ohio Supreme Court said: "[T]he jurisdiction of a trial court is invoked by a valid indictment or information and is not dependent upon the validity of the process by which the accused is originally apprehended."
Summary of this case from State v. AndersonOpinion
No. 39160
Decided December 29, 1964.
Habeas corpus — Jurisdiction not dependent on validity of process — Irregularity of arrest — Guilt or innocence — Not cognizable in habeas corpus proceeding.
IN HABEAS CORPUS.
This is an action in habeas corpus originating in this court. Petitioner, John Simpson, after signing a written waiver of counsel and a written waiver of indictment on November 21, 1963, entered a plea of guilty to an information charging him with nonsupport of his three minor children. He was sentenced to the Ohio Penitentiary.
Mr. John Simpson, in propria persona. Mr. William B. Saxbe, attorney general, and Mr. William C. Baird, for respondent.
Petitioner in this action contends that he was arrested on a false and forged affidavit, that he was not legally responsible for the support of the children involved, and that during the period he allegedly did not support such children he was incapacitated as a result of an accident and could not work.
The jurisdiction of a trial court is invoked by a valid indictment or information and is not dependent upon the validity of the process by which the accused is originally apprehended. Thus, the illegality of the process by which one is taken into custody does not affect the validity of a subsequent conviction based upon a proper indictment or information. Jetter v. Maxwell, Warden, 176 Ohio St. 219; Brown v. Maxwell, Warden, 174 Ohio St. 29. The irregularity of an arrest cannot be inquired into by habeas corpus after conviction. Shelton v. Haskins, Supt., 176 Ohio St. 296.
The petitioner urges that he was not guilty of the offense charged. The guilt or innocence of an accused is not cognizable in habeas corpus. Page v. Green, Supt., 174 Ohio St. 178; Jackson v. Maxwell, Warden, 174 Ohio St. 32; In re Poage, 87 Ohio St. 72. This is a question which must be raised by appeal.
Petitioner remanded to custody.
TAFT, C.J., ZIMMERMAN, MATTHIAS, O'NEILL, GRIFFITH, HERBERT and GIBSON, JJ., concur.