Moore v. Kochevar

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

[Cite as Moore v. Kochevar, 2004-Ohio-2687.] COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA No. 84588 HAROUN MOORE Relator vs. KENNETH KOCHEVAR Respondent : : : : : : : : : : ORIGINAL ACTION JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION DATE OF JOURNALIZATION: MAY 25, 2004 CHARACTER OF PROCEEDINGS: WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS JUDGMENT: Writ Dismissed. Motion No. 359834 APPEARANCES: For Relator: HAROUN MOORE, PRO SE Inmate No. 464-053 Lorain Correctional Inst. 2075 S. Avon Belden Road Grafton, Ohio 44044 For Respondent: WILLIAM D. MASON Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Justice Center - 9th Floor 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113 ANN DYKE, J. {¶1} On May 3, 2004, the petitioner, Haroun Moore, commenced this habeas corpus action against the respondent, Kenneth Kochevar, Superintendent of the Cuyahoga County Jail. Moore claims he is entitled to his freedom because he was denied his right to a speedy trial under R.C. 2945.73 in the underlying case, State v. Moore, Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court Case No. CR-442094. For the following reasons, this court dismisses this habeas corpus action sua sponte. {¶2} A claimed violation of a criminal defendant s right to a speedy trial is not cognizable in habeas corpus. State ex rel. Brantley v Ghee, 80 Ohio St.3d 287, 1997Ohio-116, 685 N.E.2d 1243; Prather v. Brigano, 86 Ohio St.3d 609, 1999-Ohio-212, 716 N.E.2d 197; Washington v. Tyson-Parker, 101 Ohio St.3d 131, 2004-Ohio-298, 802 N.E.2d 655; State ex rel. Sadovskiy v. McFaul (Sept. 29, 1999), Cuyahoga App. No. 77020; and Henderson v. Kochevar (Feb. 20, 2004), Cuyahoga App. No. 84048. Instead, appeal is the adequate remedy. Habeas corpus is not available if appeal provides an adequate remedy. In re Singer (1976), 45 Ohio St.2d 130, 341 N.E.2d 849. Moore s own citations support the proposition that appeal, not habeas corpus, is the proper remedy. State v. Collins (1993), 91 Ohio App.3d 10, 631 N.E.2d 666; State v. Geraldo (1983), 13 Ohio App.2d 27, 468 N.E.2d 328; and State v. Eberhardt (1978), 56 Ohio App.2d 193, 381 N.E.2d 1357, all present the speedy trial issue on appeal. {¶3} The petitioner has also failed to comply with R.C. 2969.25, which requires an affidavit that describes each civil action or appeal filed by the relator within the previous five years in any state or federal court. His failure to comply with R.C. 2969.25 warrants dismissal of the complaint for a writ of habeas corpus. State ex rel. Zanders v. Ohio Parole Bd., 82 Ohio St.3d 421, 1998-Ohio-218, 696 N.E.2d 594 and State ex rel. Alford v. Winters, 80 Ohio St.3d 285, 1997-Ohio-117, 685 N.E.2d 1242. {¶4} Accordingly, this court dismisses this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Costs assessed against petitioner. The clerk is directed to serve upon the parties notice of this judgment and its date of entry upon the journal. Civ.R. 58(B). JAMES J. SWEENEY and COLLEEN CONWAY COONEY, JJ., CONCUR.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.