Ohio Supreme Court, 1999

Russell v. Mitchell

Ohio Supreme Court · Decided January 20, 1999 · Cook, Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Stratton, Sweeney

84 Ohio St. 3d 328; 703 N.E.2d 1249

Cases that cite this one

31 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.

Palmer v. Rose, Unpublished Decision (3-10-2003) (Ohio Ct. App. 2003)
Palmer v. State, Unpublished Decision (11-20-2001) (Ohio Ct. App. 2001)
State v. Lawrence (Ohio Ct. App. 2021)
State v. Hertel (Ohio Ct. App. 2018)
State v. Bridges (Ohio Ct. App. 2017)
State v. Foster (Ohio Ct. App. 2017)
[State ex rel. Battin v. Scott (Ohio Ct. App. 2016)
State v. Peterson (Ohio Ct. App. 2016)
State v. Bolton (Ohio Ct. App. 2016)
State ex rel. Sneed v. Anderson (Ohio 2007)
State ex rel. Golson v. Moore (Ohio 2007)
State ex rel. Shackleford v. Moore (Ohio 2007)
Washington v. Tyson-Parker (Ohio 2004)
Drake v. Tyson-Parker (Ohio 2004)
Chari v. Vore (Ohio 2001)
State ex rel. Gadsden v. Lioi (Ohio 2001)
State ex rel. Bennett v. White (Ohio 2001)
State ex rel. Gadsden v. Lioi (Ohio 2001)
State ex rel. Bennett v. White (Ohio 2001)
Chari v. Vore (Ohio 2001)
State ex rel. Collins v. Pokorny (Ohio 1999)
Brown v. Leonard (Ohio 1999)
Brown v. Leonard (Ohio 1999)
State ex rel. Collins v. Pokorny (Ohio 1999)
Calo v. Eppinger (Ohio Ct. App. 2016)

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.

Russell asserts that the court of appeals erred in dismissing his habeas corpus petition. For the following reasons, however, Russell’s assertions lack merit.

*329First, as the court of appeals correctly held, Russell’s claimed violation of his right to a speedy trial is not cognizable in habeas corpus. State ex rel. Brantley v. Ghee (1997), 80 Ohio St.3d 287, 288, 685 N.E.2d 1243, 1244.

Second, res judicata precluded Russell from again raising his speedy trial claim. State ex rel. Richard v. Seidner (1996), 77 Ohio St.3d 68, 69, 671 N.E.2d 28, 28-29.

Third, the fact that Russell had already unsuccessfully invoked some of his alternate remedies did not entitle him to the requested extraordinary relief. Childers v. Wingard (1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 427, 428, 700 N.E.2d 588, 589.

Finally, Russell did not verify his petition, as required by R.C: 2725.04. Thornton v. Russell (1998), 82 Ohio St.3d 93, 95, 694 N.E.2d 464, 465.

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.