Case ID: ohio-st-3d_39/html/0138-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Woodfork, Appellant, v. Russell, Supt., Appellee.
    [Cite as Woodfork v. Russell (1988), 39 Ohio St. 3d 138.]
    (No. 88-952
    — Submitted July 5, 1988 —
    Decided October 12, 1988.)
    
      
      Luther A. Woodfork, pro se.
    
    
      Anthony J. Celebrezze, Jr., attorney general, and Alexander G. Thomas, for appellee.
   Per Curiam.

The court of appeals held that the counts of the indictment at issue were phrased in terms of the statute in compliance with Crim. R. 7 and denied the writ. Even if the indictment had been flawed, appeal or post-conviction relief, not habeas corpus, is the proper remedy. Walker v. Maxwell (1965), 1 Ohio St. 2d 136, 30 O.O. 2d 487, 205 N.E. 2d 394; Freeman v. Maxwell (1965), 4 Ohio St. 2d 4, 33 O.O. 2d 2, 210 N.E. 2d 885. Habeas corpus is not a proper remedy when a person is confined by judgment or order of a court that had jurisdiction in the matter. Stahl v. Shoemaker (1977), 50 Ohio St. 2d 351, 4 O.O. 3d 485, 364 N.E. 2d 286. Accordingly, the judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Moyer, C.J., Sweeney, Locher, Holmes, Douglas, Wright and H. Brown, JJ., concur.