State ex rel. Hart v. Turner
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State ex rel. Hart v. Turner, Slip Opinion No. 2012-Ohio-3305.] NOTICE This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requested to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typographical or other formal errors in the opinion, in order that corrections may be made before the opinion is published. SLIP OPINION NO. 2012-OHIO-3305 THE STATE EX REL. HART, APPELLANT, v. TURNER, WARDEN, APPELLEE. [Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State ex rel. Hart v. Turner, Slip Opinion No. 2012-Ohio-3305.] Court of appeals judgment dismissing petition for writ of habeas corpus affirmed. (No. 2012-0396 Submitted July 11, 2012 Decided July 24, 2012.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Marion County, No. 9-12-01. __________________ Per Curiam. {¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the petition of appellant, David Hart, for a writ of habeas corpus. Hart s speedy-trial claim is not cognizable in habeas corpus, and he had an adequate remedy by appeal from his sentencing entry to raise his claim. Tisdale v. Eberlin, 114 Ohio St.3d 201, 2007-Ohio-3833, 870 N.E.2d 1191, ¶ 7; Boles v. Knab, 130 Ohio St.3d 339, 2011-Ohio-5049, 958 N.E.2d 554, ¶ 1. Hart also waived the additional claims he raises on appeal ineffective assistance of counsel and denial of his SUPREME COURT OF OHIO rights to due process and equal protection because he failed to raise them in the court of appeals. State ex rel. Compton v. Sutula, 132 Ohio St.3d 35, 2012-Ohio1653, 968 N.E.2d 476, ¶ 4. In addition, these claims are also not cognizable in habeas corpus, and Hart had an adequate remedy by appeal to raise them. See, e.g., Everett v. Eberlin, 114 Ohio St.3d 199, 2007-Ohio-3832, 870 N.E.2d 1190, ¶ 6 (ineffective assistance of counsel); Austin v. Sacks, 172 Ohio St. 292, 175 N.E.2d 175 (1961) (due process). Judgment affirmed. O CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O DONNELL, LANZINGER, CUPP, and MCGEE BROWN, JJ., concur. __________________ David Hart, pro se. Michael DeWine, Attorney General, and Jerri L. Fosnaught, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee, Neil Turner. ______________________ 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.
