Ohio Supreme Court, 1997

State ex rel. Norris v. Boggins

Ohio Supreme Court · Decided November 19, 1997 · Cook, Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Stratton, Sweeney

80 Ohio St. 3d 296; 685 N.E.2d 1250

Cases that cite this one

3 later published cases cite this decision.

Norris v. Wilson, Unpublished Decision (8-24-2005) (Ohio Ct. App. 2005)
State ex rel. Norris v. Boggins (Ohio 1998)
State ex rel. Norris v. Boggins (Ohio 1997)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

Norris asserts that the court of appeals erred by denying the writ. Norris’s claim, however, is meritless for the following reasons.

First, habeas corpus, rather than mandamus, is the appropriate action for persons claiming entitlement to immediate release from prison. State ex rel. Lemmon v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth. (1997), 78 Ohio St.3d 186, 188, 677 N.E.2d 347, 349. Second, Norris has or had adequate legal remedies by an appeal or *297petition for postconviction relief to challenge any sentencing error. State ex rel Massie v. Rogers (1997), 77 Ohio St.3d 449, 450, 674 N.E.2d 1383, 1383.

Based on the foregoing, we affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.

Judgment affirmed.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.

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