Case Title: Nickelson v. Knab

Citation: 2012-Ohio-579

Docket Number: 2011-1472

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 2012-02-21T00:00:00Z

Document:
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as 
Nickelson v. Knab, Slip Opinion No. 2012-Ohio-579.] 
 
 
 
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-579 
NICKELSON, APPELLANT, v. KNAB, WARDEN, APPELLEE. 
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets,  
it may be cited as Nickelson v. Knab, Slip Opinion No. 2012-Ohio-579.] 
Habeas corpus—Res judicata bars attempt to obtain successive appellate review 
of claim of unreasonable delay in sentencing—Res judicata bars filing of 
successive habeas corpus petition—Judgment denying writ affirmed. 
(No. 2011-1472—Submitted February 8, 2012—Decided February 21, 2012.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Ross County, No. 11CA3244. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the 
petition of appellant, LeShawn Nickelson, for a writ of habeas corpus to compel 
his release from prison.  As the court of appeals held, Nickelson previously 
unsuccessfully raised his claim of unreasonable delay in his sentencing in his 
direct appeal, State v. Nickelson, 4th Dist. No. 09CA8, 2009-Ohio-7006, ¶ 11-12, 
and res judicata bars Nickelson from using habeas corpus to obtain a successive 
appellate review of the claim.  Shie v. Smith, 123 Ohio St.3d 89, 2009-Ohio-4079, 
914 N.E.2d 369, ¶ 2.  Moreover, because Nickelson either raised or could have 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
 
raised his claim in a previous habeas corpus case, Nickelson v. Knab, 128 Ohio 
St.3d 1423, 2011-Ohio-1049, 943 N.E.2d 570, res judicata also bars him from 
filing a successive habeas corpus petition.  Hazel v. Knab, 130 Ohio St.3d 22, 
2011-Ohio-4608, 955 N.E.2d 378, ¶ 2. 
{¶ 2} We also deny Nickelson’s motion for summary judgment.  Civ.R. 
56, which governs motions for summary judgment, is inapplicable to cases in this 
court.  See State v. McGettrick, 31 Ohio St.3d 138, 141, 509 N.E.2d 378, fn. 5 
(1987) (“Under ordinary circumstances, neither the Ohio Rules of Criminal 
Procedure nor the Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure are applicable to cases on 
appeal”); State ex rel. Physicians Commt. for Responsible Medicine v. Ohio State 
Univ. Bd. of Trustees, 108 Ohio St.3d 288, 2006-Ohio-903, 843 N.E.2d 174, ¶ 17 
(“The Rules of Practice that govern original actions filed in this court do not 
permit parties to file motions for summary judgment”).  And notwithstanding 
Nickelson’s claim to the contrary, appellee did file a timely merit brief. 
{¶ 3} Further, we deny Nickelson’s request for oral argument because 
the parties’ briefs are sufficient for the court to decide this appeal.  State ex rel. 
Tindira v. Ohio Police & Fire Pension Fund, 130 Ohio St.3d 62, 2011-Ohio-
4677, 955 N.E.2d 963, ¶ 55. 
{¶ 4} Finally, we deny Nickelson’s motion to strike appellee’s merit 
brief. 
Judgment affirmed. 
O’CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’DONNELL, 
LANZINGER, CUPP, and MCGEE BROWN, JJ., concur. 
__________________ 
 
LeShawn Nickelson, pro se. 
 
Michael DeWine, Attorney General, and Morgan A. Linn, Assistant 
Attorney General, for appellee. 
______________________