Case Name: Briseno, Appellant, v. Cook, Warden, Appellee
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 2009-02-03
Citations: 121 Ohio St. 3d 38
Docket Number: No. 2008-1733
Parties: Briseno, Appellant, v. Cook, Warden, Appellee.
Judges: Moyer, C.J., and Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, and Cupp, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Ohio State Reports, Third Service
Volume: 121
Pages: 38–39

Head Matter:
Briseno, Appellant, v. Cook, Warden, Appellee.
[Cite as Briseno v. Cook, 121 Ohio St.3d 38, 2009-Ohio-308.]
(No. 2008-1733 —
Submitted December 17, 2008 —
Decided February 3, 2009.)
Kenneth J. Rexford & Co., L.L.C., and Kenneth J. Rexford, for appellant.
Richard Cordray, Attorney General, and M. Scott Criss, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the habeas corpus petition of appellant, Antonio Briseno. Appellant had an adequate remedy by way of direct appeal from his sentence to raise his claim that he did not receive proper notification about postrelease control at his sentencing hearing. Patterson v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth., 120 Ohio St.3d 311, 2008-Ohio-6147, 898 N.E.2d 950, ¶ 8; Watkins v. Collins, 111 Ohio St.3d 425, 2006-Ohio-5082, 857 N.E.2d 78, ¶ 45 and 53.
Judgment affirmed.
Moyer, C.J., and Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O'Connor, O'Donnell, Lanzinger, and Cupp, JJ., concur.