Ball v. Maxwell
Ohio Supreme Court
Ball v. Maxwell, 177 Ohio St. (N.S.) 39 (Ohio 1964)
Gibson, Griffith, Herbert, Matthias, Neill, Taft, Zimmerman
Ball v. Maxwell
Opinion of the Court
In this action in habeas corpus, petitioner is attacking only his convictions under the November 1960 indictment. It is his contention that he has been denied due process because of a lack of an adequate appellate review.
However, relief by habeas corpus cannot be given, since
Petitioner remanded to custody.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Ball v. Maxwell, Warden
- Status
- Published