176 N.E.2d 223

ABNEY v. SACKS, WARDEN.

No. 36988Supreme Court of Ohio.
Decided July 12, 1961.

Habeas corpus — Not available as substitute for adequate remedy by appeal.

IN HABEAS CORPUS.

The petitioner was indicted for the offense of felonious assault, under authority of Section 2903.01, Revised Code, pleaded not guilty, was tried by the court, convicted and sentenced to the Ohio Penitentiary for a period of from one to ten years, was twice paroled and twice declared a parole violator and was returned to the penitentiary where he is presently serving his one-to-ten-year sentence.

Petitioner now seeks his release from incarceration by this habeas corpus proceeding, contending that he was deprived of his constitutional right to due process by misconduct of the prosecuting attorney concurred in by the trial judge, by the act of coercion of a witness committed by the trial judge, by failure to subpoena petitioner’s witnesses, and by incompetent counsel.

Mr. Roy Abney, in propria persona.
Mr. Mark McElroy, attorney general, Mr. Aubrey A. Wendt and Mr. John J. Connors, Jr., for respondent.

Page 402

Per Curiam.

Petitioner had an adequate remedy by way of appeal from the judgment of conviction and sentence to review the alleged errors and irregularities which are nonjurisdictional and of which he here complains and cannot now have such a review by a proceeding in habeas corpus.

Petitioner remanded to custody.

WEYGANDT, C.J., ZIMMERMAN, TAFT, MATTHIAS, BELL, RADCLIFF and O’NEILL, JJ., concur.

RADCLIFF, J., of the Fourth Appellate District, sitting by designation in the place and stead of HERBERT, J.