Case Title: Harris v Bagley

Citation: 2002-Ohio-5369

Docket Number: 20020928

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 2002-10-23T00:00:00Z

Document:
[Cite as Harris v Bagley, 97 Ohio St.3d 98, 2002-Ohio-5369.] 
 
 
 
HARRIS, APPELLANT, v. BAGLEY, WARDEN, APPELLEE. 
[Cite as Harris v. Bagley, 97 Ohio St.3d 98, 2002-Ohio-5369.] 
Habeas corpus sought to compel prison warden to immediately release relator 
from prison — Dismissal of petition affirmed. 
(No. 2002-0928 — Submitted September 25, 2002 — Decided October 23, 2002.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Richland County, No. 02-CA-29. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam. 
{¶1} 
In September 2000, appellant, Matthew Harris, was convicted of 
one count of rape and was sentenced to nine years in prison.  In April 2002, Harris 
filed a petition in the Court of Appeals for Richland County for a writ of habeas 
corpus to compel his immediate release from prison.  Harris claimed that his 
conviction and sentence were void because no proper criminal complaint had ever 
been filed against him before he was indicted.  The court of appeals dismissed the 
petition because a writ of habeas corpus “is not available to challenge the validity 
or sufficiency of an indictment.” 
{¶2} 
In his appeal as of right, Harris contends that the court of appeals 
erred in dismissing his petition.  We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals. 
{¶3} 
“Any defect caused by the alleged failure to file criminal 
complaints or the claimed impropriety of the municipal court’s assumption of 
jurisdiction over the rape charges is not cognizable in habeas corpus.”  Taylor v. 
Mitchell (2000), 88 Ohio St.3d 453, 454, 727 N.E.2d 905.  Harris was convicted 
and sentenced upon an indictment, and his trial court had the requisite jurisdiction 
to try, convict, and sentence him on the charged offense.  State ex rel. Jackson v. 
Brigano (2000), 88 Ohio St.3d 180, 181, 724 N.E.2d 424; see, also, Orr v. Mack 
(1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 429, 430, 700 N.E.2d 590. 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
{¶4} 
Based on the foregoing, we affirm the judgment of the court of 
appeals.1 
Judgment affirmed. 
 
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and 
LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. 
__________________ 
 
Matthew Harris, pro se. 
 
Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General, and Mark J. Zemba, Assistant 
Attorney General, for appellee. 
__________________ 
                                                 
1. 
Our judgment renders moot Harris’s motion to strike portions of Bagley’s brief.