Briseno v. Cook

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

[Cite as Briseno v. Cook, 121 Ohio St.3d 38, 2009-Ohio-308.] BRISENO, APPELLANT, v. COOK, WARDEN, APPELLEE. [Cite as Briseno v. Cook, 121 Ohio St.3d 38, 2009-Ohio-308.] Habeas corpus Writ not available when petitioner had adequate remedy by way of direct appeal Writ denied. (No. 2008-1733 Submitted December 17, 2008 Decided February 3, 2009.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Madison County, No. CA2008-05-012. __________________ 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. __________________ 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. ______________________

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.