Case Name: [The State ex rel.] Norris, Appellant, v. Boggins, Judge, Appellee
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1997-11-19
Citations: 80 Ohio St. 3d 296
Docket Number: No. 97-223
Parties: [The State ex rel.] Norris, Appellant, v. Boggins, Judge, Appellee.
Judges: Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Ohio State Reports, Third Service
Volume: 80
Pages: 296–297

Head Matter:
[The State ex rel.] Norris, Appellant, v. Boggins, Judge, Appellee.
[Cite as State ex rel. Norris v. Boggins (1997), 80 Ohio St.3d 296.]
(No. 97-223
Submitted October 7, 1997
Decided November 19, 1997.)
Robert Lee Norris, pro se.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
Norris asserts that the court of appeals erred by denying the writ. Norris's claim, however, is meritless for the following reasons.
First, habeas corpus, rather than mandamus, is the appropriate action for persons claiming entitlement to immediate release from prison. State ex rel. Lemmon v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth. (1997), 78 Ohio St.3d 186, 188, 677 N.E.2d 347, 349. Second, Norris has or had adequate legal remedies by an appeal or petition for postconviction relief to challenge any sentencing error. State ex rel Massie v. Rogers (1997), 77 Ohio St.3d 449, 450, 674 N.E.2d 1383, 1383.
Based on the foregoing, we affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.
Judgment affirmed.
Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.