From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Williamson v. Williams

Supreme Court of Ohio
Aug 18, 2004
2004 Ohio 4111 (Ohio 2004)

Opinion

No. 2004-0617.

Submitted July 20, 2004.

Decided August 18, 2004.

APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Allen County, No. 1-04-04.

Charles F. Williamson Jr., pro se.

Jim Petro, Attorney General, and Thelma Thomas Price, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.


{¶ 1} In June 1992, appellant, Charles F. Williamson Jr., was convicted of murder and an accompanying firearm specification and sentenced to prison. On appeal, the court of appeals affirmed his conviction and sentence. State v. Williamson (Sept. 13, 1993), Stark App. No. CA-9068, 1993 WL 385288.

{¶ 2} In January 2004, Williamson filed a petition in the Court of Appeals for Allen County for a writ of habeas corpus to compel appellee, Allen Correctional Institution Warden Jesse Williams, to release him from prison. Williamson claimed entitlement to the writ because of police misconduct arising from the presentation of perjured statements and denial of Miranda rights, municipal court improprieties, prosecutorial misconduct, an illegal indictment, and trial court error in permitting a jury instruction on a lesser included offense. The warden moved to dismiss the petition. On March 3, 2004, the court of appeals granted the warden's motion and dismissed the petition.

{¶ 3} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals. Habeas corpus is not an appropriate remedy to raise Williamson's claims. See, e.g., O'Bannon v. Haskins (1965), 1 Ohio St.2d 110, 111, 30 O.O.2d 430, 205 N.E.2d 16 (perjured testimony); Malone v. Lane, 96 Ohio St.3d 415, 2002-Ohio-4908, 775 N.E.2d 527, ¶ 4 (denial of Miranda rights); Harris v. Bagley, 97 Ohio St.3d 98, 2002-Ohio-5369, 776 N.E.2d 490, ¶ 3 (defect in municipal court's assumption of jurisdiction when petitioner is subsequently convicted and sentenced upon an indictment); Wilson v. Rogers (1993), 68 Ohio St.3d 130, 131, 623 N.E.2d 1210 (prosecutorial misconduct); Galloway v. Money, 100 Ohio St.3d 74, 2003-Ohio-5060, 796 N.E.2d 528, ¶ 6 (validity or sufficiency of indictment); State ex rel. Richard v. Seidner (1996), 76 Ohio St.3d 149, 152, 666 N.E.2d 1134 (instructions on lesser included offense). Williamson had an adequate legal remedy by direct appeal to raise these claims.

Judgment affirmed.

Moyer, C.J., Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Stratton, O'Connor and O'Donnell, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Williamson v. Williams

Supreme Court of Ohio
Aug 18, 2004
2004 Ohio 4111 (Ohio 2004)
Case details for

Williamson v. Williams

Case Details

Full title:Williamson, Appellant, v. Williams, Warden, Appellees

Court:Supreme Court of Ohio

Date published: Aug 18, 2004

Citations

2004 Ohio 4111 (Ohio 2004)
2004 Ohio 4111
812 N.E.2d 1283

Citing Cases

State ex rel. Curtis v. Bunting

Claims of prosecutorial misconduct or perjury, which Curtis raises in his complaint, are not cognizable in…

State ex Rel. Hamilton v. Brunner

State ex rel. Wilcox v. Seidner (1996), 76 Ohio St.3d 412, 415, 667 N.E.2d 1220. Nor are municipal court…