OPINIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO The full texts of the opinions of the Supreme Court of Ohio are being transmitted electronically beginning May 27, 1992, pursuant to a pilot project implemented by Chief Justice Thomas J. Moyer. Please call any errors to the attention of the Reporter's Office of the Supreme Court of Ohio. Attention: Walter S. Kobalka, Reporter, or Deborah J. Whitten, Administrative Assistant. Tel.: (614) 466-4961; in Ohio 1-800-826-9010. Your comments on this pilot project are also welcome. NOTE: Corrections may be made by the Supreme Court to the full texts of the opinions after they have been released electronically to the public. The reader is therefore advised to check the bound volumes of Ohio St.3d published by West Publishing Company for the final versions of these opinions. The advance sheets to Ohio St.3d will also contain the volume and page numbers where the opinions will be found in the bound volumes of the Ohio Official Reports.

The State ex rel. Tucker, Appellant, v. Rogers, Warden, Appellee. [Cite as State ex rel. Tucker v. Rogers (1993), Ohio St.3d .] Habeas corpus not available when adequate remedy at law exists -- Order revoking probation and imposing sentence is a final, appealable order from which an appeal is routinely taken. (No. 92-1710 -- Submitted January 19, 1993 -- Decided February 24, 1993.) Appeal from the Court of Appeals for Allen County, No. 1-92-59. Appellant, Hubert Tucker, Sr., filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the Court of Appeals for Allen County, claiming that his probation was revoked without due process of law as guaranteed in Gagnon v. Scarpelli (1973), 411 U.S. 778, 93 S.Ct. 1756, 36 L.Ed.2d 656. The court of appeals dismissed the petition, holding that appellant had an adequate remedy at law through appeal.

Hubert Tucker, Sr., pro se.

Per Curiam. We affirm the decision of the court of appeals. In In re Hunt (1976), 46 Ohio St.2d 378, 75 O.O.2d 450, 348 N.E.2d 727, paragraph two of the syllabus, we held that "[a] writ of habeas corpus will ordinarily be denied where there is an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law." An order revoking probation and imposing sentence is a final, appealable order from which an appeal is routinely taken. See, e.g., State v. McMullen (1983), 6 Ohio St. 3d 244, 6 OBR 312, 452 N.E.2d 1292; State v. Walden (1988), 54 Ohio App.3d 160, 561 N.E.2d 995. Accordingly, the decision of the court of appeals is affirmed. Judgment affirmed. Moyer, C.J., A.W. Sweeney, Douglas, Wright, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur.