Title: Hunt v. Sheldon

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as 
Hunt v. Sheldon, Slip Opinion No. 2010-Ohio-4991.] 
 
 
 
 
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. 2010-OHIO-4991 
HUNT, APPELLANT, v. SHELDON, WARDEN, APPELLEE. 
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it 
may be cited as Hunt v. Sheldon, Slip Opinion No. 2010-Ohio-4991.] 
Court of appeals’ judgment dismissing petition for writ of habeas corpus 
affirmed. 
(No. 2010-0971 — Submitted October 13, 2010 — Decided October 20, 2010.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Marion County, No. 9-10-28. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the 
amended petition of appellant, Rickie Lee Hunt, for a writ of habeas corpus to 
compel his release from prison.  “ ‘[H]abeas corpus is proper in the criminal 
context only if the petitioner is entitled to immediate release from prison or some 
other physical confinement.’ ”  Keith v. Bobby, 117 Ohio St.3d 470, 2008-Ohio-
1443, 884 N.E.2d 1067, ¶ 12, quoting Scanlon v. Brunsman, 112 Ohio St.3d 151, 
2006-Ohio-6522, 858 N.E.2d 411, ¶ 4.  Hunt’s prison sentence has not expired, 
and he has no inherent or constitutional right to be released before its expiration, 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
 
State ex rel. White v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth., 98 Ohio St.3d 290, 2003-Ohio-
773, 783 N.E.2d 900, ¶ 3; Hattie v. Anderson (1994), 68 Ohio St.3d 232, 233, 626 
N.E.2d 67 (“R.C. 2967.03 creates no expectancy of parole or a constitutional 
liberty interest sufficient to establish a right of procedural due process”); Layne v. 
Ohio Adult Parole Auth., 97 Ohio St.3d 456, 2002-Ohio-6719, 780 N.E.2d 548, ¶ 
28 (Ohio Adult Parole Authority “has wide-ranging discretion in parole matters”).  
We deny appellant’s motion for oral argument and appointment of counsel. 
Judgment affirmed. 
 
BROWN, 
C.J., 
and 
PFEIFER, 
LUNDBERG 
STRATTON, 
O’CONNOR, 
O’DONNELL, LANZINGER, and CUPP, JJ., concur. 
__________________ 
 
Rickie Lee Hunt, pro se. 
 
Richard Cordray, Attorney General, and Stephanie Watson, Principal 
Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. 
______________________