Title: McClellan v. Mack

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as 
McClellan v. Mack, Slip Opinion No. 2011-Ohio-4216.] 
 
 
 
 
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. 2011-OHIO-4216 
MCCLELLAN, APPELLANT, v. MACK, WARDEN, APPELLEE. 
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it 
may be cited as McClellan v. Mack, Slip Opinion No. 2011-Ohio-4216.] 
Habeas corpus — Res judicata does not deprive a court of jurisdiction and hence 
is not a basis for extraordinary relief — Dismissal of petition affirmed. 
(No. 2011-0546 — Submitted August 8, 2011 — Decided September 1, 2011.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Montgomery County, No. 24326. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment dismissing the petition of appellant, James 
McClellan, for a writ of habeas corpus to compel his immediate release from 
prison. 
{¶ 2} McClellan’s claim that res judicata barred the relitigation of the 
propriety of a traffic stop that led to a search of his vehicle and the seizure of 
evidence used by the state to prosecute him is not cognizable in habeas corpus.  
“[R]es judicata is not an appropriate basis for extraordinary relief, because ‘res 
judicata does not divest a trial court of jurisdiction to decide its applicability, and 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
 
the denial of this defense by the trial court can be adequately challenged by post-
judgment appeal.’ ”  Smith v. Voorhies, 119 Ohio St.3d 345, 2008-Ohio-4479, 894 
N.E.2d 44, ¶ 9, quoting State ex rel. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v. Henson, 96 Ohio 
St.3d 33, 2002-Ohio-2851, 770 N.E.2d 580, ¶ 11. 
{¶ 3} Moreover, McClellan could have raised this claim in his direct 
appeal.  But he did not.  State v. McClellan, Allen App. No. 1-09-21, 2010-Ohio-
314.  Thus, res judicata bars raising it here.  Smith at ¶ 11.  And the mere fact that 
he has already unsuccessfully invoked his appellate remedy does not thereby 
entitle him to the requested extraordinary relief in habeas corpus.  Everett v. 
Eberlin, 114 Ohio St.3d 199, 2007-Ohio-3832, 870 N.E.2d 1190, ¶ 6. 
{¶ 4} Therefore, the court of appeals correctly dismissed McClellan’s 
petition for a writ of habeas corpus, and we affirm that judgment. 
Judgment affirmed. 
O’CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’DONNELL, 
LANZINGER, CUPP, and MCGEE BROWN, JJ., concur. 
__________________ 
 
James McClellan, pro se. 
 
Michael DeWine, Attorney General, and Gene D. Park, Assistant Attorney 
General, for appellee. 
______________________