Case ID: ohio-st-3d_90/html/0075-01.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

Bradford, Appellant, v. Moore, Warden, Appellee.
    [Cite as Bradford v. Moore (2000), 90 Ohio St.3d 75.]
    (No. 00-715
    Submitted August 22, 2000
    Decided September 20, 2000.)
    
      Derrick A. Bradford, pro se.
    
    
      Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General, and Diane Mallory, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
   Per Curiam.

We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals because a “claimed violation of R.C. 2945.05 is not the proper subject for habeas corpus relief and may be remedied only in a direct appeal from a criminal conviction.” State ex rel. Earl v. Mitchell (1999), 87 Ohio St.3d 259, 260, 719 N.E.2d 545, 546; State v. Pless (1996), 74 Ohio St.3d 333, 658 N.E.2d 766, paragraph two of the syllabus.

Judgment affirmed.

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