Title: Gotel v. Gansheimer

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Cite as Gotel v. Gansheimer, 116 Ohio St.3d 316, 2007-Ohio-6437.] 
 
 
GOTEL, APPELLANT, v. GANSHEIMER, WARDEN, APPELLEE. 
[Cite as Gotel v. Gansheimer, 116 Ohio St.3d 316, 2007-Ohio-6437.] 
Habeas corpus — Petition failed to state a viable claim — Court of appeal’s 
dismissal of petition affirmed. 
(No. 2007-1028 ─ Submitted November 28, 2007 ─ Decided  
December 13, 2007.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Ashtabula County, 
No. 2006-A-0087, 2007-Ohio-2311. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} This is an appeal from a judgment dismissing a habeas corpus 
petition.  Because the petition failed to state a viable claim, we affirm. 
{¶ 2} In 2005, the Lake County Court of Common Pleas convicted 
appellant, Daryl L. Gotel, of robbery and sentenced him to six years in prison.  
Gotel had pleaded guilty to the indictment charge.  On appeal, the court of appeals 
affirmed the judgment.  State v. Gotel, Lake App. No. 2006-L-015, 2007-Ohio-
888. 
{¶ 3} In 2006, Gotel filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus to 
compel appellee, Lake Erie Correctional Institution Warden Rich Gansheimer, to 
release him from prison.  Gotel claimed that the trial court had lacked jurisdiction 
to convict and sentence him on the robbery charge because no criminal complaint 
on that charge had ever been filed in the municipal court before the case was 
transferred to the trial court.  The warden filed a Civ.R. 12(B)(6) motion to 
dismiss the petition for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.  
The court of appeals granted the motion and dismissed the petition. 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
{¶ 4} In his appeal as of right, Gotel claims that the court of appeals 
erred in dismissing his habeas corpus petition.  For the following reasons, Gotel’s 
claim lacks merit. 
{¶ 5} Any defect resulting from the alleged failure to file a criminal 
complaint is not cognizable in habeas corpus, because Gotel was convicted and 
sentenced upon his guilty plea to an indictment, and the trial court had the 
requisite jurisdiction to try, convict, and sentence him upon the robbery offense.  
Boylen v. Bradshaw, 108 Ohio St.3d 181, 2006-Ohio-549, 842 N.E.2d 49, ¶ 5. 
{¶ 6} Moreover, “ ‘[t]he manner by which an accused is charged with a 
crime is procedural rather than jurisdictional, and after a conviction for crimes 
charged in an indictment, the judgment binds the defendant for the crime for 
which he was convicted.’ ”  State ex rel. Nelson v. Griffin, 103 Ohio St.3d 167, 
2004-Ohio-4754, 814 N.E.2d 866, ¶ 6, quoting Orr v. Mack (1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 
429, 430, 700 N.E.2d 590. 
{¶ 7} Therefore, we affirm the judgment of the court of appeals 
dismissing Gotel’s petition. 
 
Judgment affirmed. 
 
MOYER, 
C.J., 
and 
PFEIFER, 
LUNDBERG 
STRATTON, 
O’CONNOR, 
O’DONNELL, LANZINGER, and CUPP, JJ., concur. 
__________________ 
 
Daryl L. Gotel, pro se. 
 
Marc Dann, Attorney General, and Diane Mallory, Assistant Attorney 
General, for appellee. 
______________________