Shie v. Smith
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as Shie v. Smith, 123 Ohio St.3d 89, 2009-Ohio-4079.] SHIE, APPELLANT, v. SMITH, WARDEN, APPELLEE. [Cite as Shie v. Smith, 123 Ohio St.3d 89, 2009-Ohio-4079.] Appeal from dismissal of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus Habeas corpus not available to remedy claim concerning sentencing error Judgment affirmed. (No. 2009-0704 Submitted August 11, 2009 Decided August 19, 2009.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Richland County, No. 09 CA 21, 2009-Ohio-1661. __________________ Per Curiam. {¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the petition of appellant, David Zion Shie, for a writ of habeas corpus. {¶ 2} Shie s claim of sentencing error is not cognizable in habeas corpus, and he had an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law by direct appeal to raise that issue. State ex rel. Shackleford v. Moore, 116 Ohio St.3d 310, 2007Ohio-6462, 878 N.E.2d 1035, ¶ 5. In fact, Shie already unsuccessfully raised the same issue in his direct appeal, see State v. Shie, Cuyahoga App. No. 88677, 2007-Ohio-3773, appeal not accepted for review, 116 Ohio St.3d 1440, 2007Ohio-6518, 877 N.E.2d 991, and res judicata bars him from using habeas corpus to obtain a successive appellate review. State ex rel. Mowen v. Mowen, 119 Ohio St.3d 462, 2008-Ohio-4759, 895 N.E.2d 163, ¶ 17. {¶ 3} Moreover, because habeas corpus is appropriate in the criminal context only when the petitioner is entitled to immediate release from prison or some other physical confinement, Shie is not entitled to the writ because he is also incarcerated for a parole revocation on a prior offense that he does not challenge. Keith v. Bobby, 117 Ohio St.3d 470, 2008-Ohio-1443, 884 N.E.2d 1067, ¶ 12-13. SUPREME COURT OF OHIO {¶ 4} Finally, Shie s petition is fatally defective and subject to dismissal because he did not attach copies of all of his pertinent commitment papers. Knowles v. Voorhies, 121 Ohio St.3d 271, 2009-Ohio-1109, 903 N.E.2d 637, ¶ 1. {¶ 5} Therefore, the court of appeals properly dismissed Shie s habeas corpus petition. We also deny Shie s motion for oral argument. Judgment affirmed. MOYER, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O CONNOR, O DONNELL, LANZINGER, and CUPP, JJ., concur. __________________ David Zion Shie, pro se. Richard Cordray, Attorney General, and Samuel Peterson, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. ______________________ 2
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.
