Summary
In McConnaughy v. Alvis (1956), 165 Ohio St. 102, 59 O.O. 103, 133 N.E.2d 133, we held that ineffective assistance of trial counsel is a nonjurisdictional claim that must be raised by appeal.
Summary of this case from State ex Rel. Dotson v. RogersOpinion
No. 34658
Decided March 21, 1956.
Habeas corpus — Not available to review irregularities in conduct of trial or sentence — Not substitute for remedy by appeal.
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County.
The appellant, McConnaughy, was indicted in Belmont County on a charge of rape committed in that county. When brought before the court for arraignment, he was not represented by counsel, and, it appearing that he did not have sufficient means with which to employ counsel, the court appointed counsel to represent him. He was arraigned, pleaded guilty, and was sentenced.
By this action in habeas corpus, instituted in the Court of Appeals, appellant seeks his release from the Ohio Penitentiary where he is confined under that sentence. He bases his right to release on the claims that the crime for which he was sentenced occurred just within the border of the adjoining county of Monroe and thus the Belmont County court had no jurisdiction in the case; that because of inefficient counsel he was denied his right to a fair trial; and that certain defects in the service of papers on him voided the sentence.
The Court of Appeals denied the relief sought, and an appeal as of right brings the cause to this court for review.
Mr. Francis M. Marley, for appellant.
Mr. C. William O'Neill, attorney general, Mr. William A. Carroll and Mr. Roger B. Turrell, for appellee.
The indictment returned by the Grand Jury of Belmont County charged the offense as having been committed in Belmont County. The truth of the material allegations of the indictment, including venue, was admitted by the entering of a plea of guilty. The question of venue was not raised in the trial court. The court had jurisdiction to pronounce sentence. Under such circumstances the remedy, if any, is by appeal, not habeas corpus. Burns v. Tarbox, Sheriff, 76 Ohio St. 520, 81 N.E. 761.
The other issues presented as to denial of fair trial because of inefficient counsel and defects in service of papers could have been determined on appeal in the criminal action. The remedy as to errors or irregularities in the conduct of the trial or in the sentence of the accused was by appeal and is not by habeas corpus, where the court had jurisdiction of the crime and the person. In re Whitmore, 137 Ohio St. 313, 29 N.E.2d 363; Ex parte Van Hagan, 25 Ohio St. 426; Section 2725. 05, Revised Code.
The judgment of the Court of Appeals is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
WEYGANDT, C.J., MATTHIAS, HART, ZIMMERMAN, STEWART, BELL and TAFT, JJ., concur.