Title: Williamson v. Williams

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Cite as Williamson v. Williams, 103 Ohio St.3d 25, 2004-Ohio-4111.] 
 
 
WILLIAMSON, APPELLANT, v. WILLIAMS, WARDEN, APPELLEES. 
[Cite as Williamson v. Williams, 103 Ohio St.3d 25, 2004-Ohio-4111.] 
Habeas corpus – Writ denied, when. 
(No. 2004-0617 — Submitted July 20, 2004 — Decided August 18, 2004.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Allen County, No. 1-04-04. 
____________________ 
 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} In June 1992, appellant, Charles F. Williamson Jr., was convicted 
of murder and an accompanying firearm specification and sentenced to prison.  
On appeal, the court of appeals affirmed his conviction and sentence.  State v. 
Williamson (Sept. 13, 1993), Stark App. No. CA-9068, 1993 WL 385288. 
{¶ 2} In January 2004, Williamson filed a petition in the Court of 
Appeals for Allen County for a writ of habeas corpus to compel appellee, Allen 
Correctional Institution Warden Jesse Williams, to release him from prison.  
Williamson claimed entitlement to the writ because of police misconduct arising 
from the presentation of perjured statements and denial of Miranda rights, 
municipal court improprieties, prosecutorial misconduct, an illegal indictment, 
and trial court error in permitting a jury instruction on a lesser included offense.  
The warden moved to dismiss the petition.  On March 3, 2004, the court of 
appeals granted the warden’s motion and dismissed the petition. 
{¶ 3} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.  Habeas corpus is 
not an appropriate remedy to raise Williamson’s claims.  See, e.g., O’Bannon v. 
Haskins (1965), 1 Ohio St.2d 110, 111, 30 O.O.2d 430, 205 N.E.2d 16 (perjured 
testimony);  Malone v. Lane, 96 Ohio St.3d 415, 2002-Ohio-4908, 775 N.E.2d 
527, ¶ 4 (denial of Miranda rights); Harris v. Bagley, 97 Ohio St.3d 98, 2002-
Ohio-5369, 776 N.E.2d 490, ¶ 3 (defect in municipal court’s assumption of 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
jurisdiction when petitioner is subsequently convicted and sentenced upon an 
indictment); Wilson v. Rogers (1993), 68 Ohio St.3d 130, 131, 623 N.E.2d 1210 
(prosecutorial misconduct); Galloway v. Money, 100 Ohio St.3d 74, 2003-Ohio-
5060, 796 N.E.2d 528, ¶ 6 (validity or sufficiency of indictment); State ex rel. 
Richard v. Seidner (1996), 76 Ohio St.3d 149, 152, 666 N.E.2d 1134 (instructions 
on lesser included offense).  Williamson had an adequate legal remedy by direct 
appeal to raise these claims. 
Judgment affirmed. 
 
MOYER, C.J., RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, 
O’CONNOR and O’DONNELL, JJ., concur. 
____________________________ 
 
Charles F. Williamson Jr., pro se. 
 
Jim Petro, Attorney General, and Thelma Thomas Price, Assistant 
Attorney General, for appellee. 
_____________________________