Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law
Ohio Supreme Court, 1951

In Re Ames

In Re Ames
Ohio Supreme Court · Decided March 28, 1951 · Weygandt, Zimmerman, Middleton, Matthias, Hart, Stewart, Taft, Levenson, Ohio
98 N.E.2d 2; 155 Ohio St. 184; 155 Ohio St. (N.S.) 184; 44 Ohio Op. 161; 1951 Ohio LEXIS 554 (North Eastern Reporter, Second Series)

In Re Ames

Opinion

*185 Per Curiam.

The remedy for review of errors or irregularities in the conduct of a criminal trial or sentence after, conviction is by appeal and not by habeas corpus, where the committing court had jurisdiction of the subject matter and the person. Ex parte Van Hagan. 25 Ohio St., 426; In re Whitmore, 137 Ohio St., 313, 29 N. E. (2d), 363; In re Burson, 152 Ohio St., 375, 89 N. E. (2d), 651.

Petitioner remanded to custody.

Weygandt, C. J., Zimmerman, Middleton, Matthias and Hart, JJ., concur. Stewart and Taft, JJ., concur in the judgment for the reasons stated in the concurring opinion in In re Levenson, 154 Ohio St., 278.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.

↑