Case Title: State ex rel. Hart v. Turner

Citation: 2012-Ohio-3305

Docket Number: 2012-0396

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 2012-07-24T00:00:00Z

Document:
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as 
State ex rel. Hart v. Turner, Slip Opinion No. 2012-Ohio-3305.] 
 
 
 
 
NOTICE 
This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in 
an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports.  Readers are requested 
to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 
65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typographical or 
other formal errors in the opinion, in order that corrections may be 
made before the opinion is published. 
 
SLIP OPINION NO. 2012-OHIO-3305 
THE STATE EX REL. HART, APPELLANT, v. TURNER, WARDEN, APPELLEE. 
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets,  
it may be cited as State ex rel. Hart v. Turner,  
Slip Opinion No. 2012-Ohio-3305.] 
Court of appeals’ judgment dismissing petition for writ of habeas corpus 
affirmed. 
(No. 2012-0396—Submitted July 11, 2012—Decided July 24, 2012.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Marion County, No. 9-12-01. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the 
petition of appellant, David Hart, for a writ of habeas corpus.  Hart’s speedy-trial 
claim is not cognizable in habeas corpus, and he had an adequate remedy by 
appeal from his sentencing entry to raise his claim.  Tisdale v. Eberlin, 114 Ohio 
St.3d 201, 2007-Ohio-3833, 870 N.E.2d 1191, ¶ 7; Boles v. Knab, 130 Ohio St.3d 
339, 2011-Ohio-5049, 958 N.E.2d 554, ¶ 1.  Hart also waived the additional 
claims he raises on appeal—ineffective assistance of counsel and denial of his 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
 
rights to due process and equal protection—because he failed to raise them in the 
court of appeals.  State ex rel. Compton v. Sutula, 132 Ohio St.3d 35, 2012-Ohio-
1653, 968 N.E.2d 476, ¶ 4.  In addition, these claims are also not cognizable in 
habeas corpus, and Hart had an adequate remedy by appeal to raise them.  See, 
e.g., Everett v. Eberlin, 114 Ohio St.3d 199, 2007-Ohio-3832, 870 N.E.2d 1190, 
¶ 6 (ineffective assistance of counsel); Austin v. Sacks, 172 Ohio St. 292, 175 
N.E.2d 175 (1961) (due process). 
Judgment affirmed. 
O’CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’DONNELL, 
LANZINGER, CUPP, and MCGEE BROWN, JJ., concur. 
__________________ 
 
David Hart, pro se. 
 
Michael DeWine, Attorney General, and Jerri L. Fosnaught, Assistant 
Attorney General, for appellee, Neil Turner. 
______________________