Taylor v. Bradshaw

[Cite as Taylor v. Bradshaw, 2016-Ohio-5067.]
COURT OF APPEALS
RICHLAND COUNTY, OHIO
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
JUDGES:
JACKIE TAYLOR : Hon. W. Scott Gwin, P.J.
: Hon. Patricia A. Delaney, J.
Petitioner : Hon. Craig R. Baldwin, J.
:
-vs- :
: Case No. 15CA90
WARDEN MARGARET BRADSHAW :
:
Respondent : OPINION
CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Writ
JUDGMENT: Dismissed
DATE OF JUDGMENT ENTRY: July 21, 2016
APPEARANCES:
For Petitioner For Respondent
JACKIE TAYLOR MAURA O'NEILL JAITE
P.O. BOX 8107 SENIOR ASSISTANT ATTORNEY
Mansfield, OH 44901 OHIO ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE
150 East Gay Street, 16th Floor
Columbus, OH 43215
Richland County, Case No. 15CA90 2
Gwin, P.J.
{¶1} Petitioner, Jackie Taylor, has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
alleging the trial court lacked jurisdiction to sentence him for crimes for which he was not
indicted. Respondent has filed a Motion for Summary Judgment and Motion to Dismiss
for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Petitioner has also filed a
Motion for Summary Judgment.
{¶2} Petitioner was convicted by a jury of Aggravated Burglary, Aggravated
Robbery, Theft from the Elderly, and Possession of Cocaine. According to the sentencing
entry attached to the Petition, the counts of the indictment were renumbered. It is
Petitioner’s contention he is entitled to a writ of habeas corpus because the count
numbers presented to the jury were not the same as the count numbers of the indictment.
Counts 1 through 12 of the indictment are all related to Petitioner’s co-defendant.
Petitioner’s indictment began with Count 13. Petitioner was found guilty and sentenced
on renumbered Counts 1, 2, 7, and 8. The aggregate sentence was 15 years in prison
which has not yet expired.
{¶3} In a case similar to the case at bar, we held Petitioner has or had an
adequate remedy at law by way of appeal where the sentencing entry contained a clerical
error as to the count numbers. We held, “Petitioner has or had an adequate remedy at
law by way of direct appeal to challenge any defect in his sentence. ‘Like other
extraordinary-writ actions, habeas corpus is not available when there is an adequate
remedy in the ordinary course of law.’ In re Complaint for Writ of Habeas Corpus for
Goeller, 103 Ohio St. 3d 427, 2004–Ohio–5579, 816 N.E.2d 594, ¶ 6.” Gooden v.
Richland County, Case No. 15CA90 3
Bradshaw, 5th Dist. Richland No. 11CA55, 2011-Ohio-5300, ¶ 4, aff'd, 132 Ohio St. 3d 45,
2012-Ohio-2013, 968 N.E.2d 484, ¶ 4 (2012).
{¶4} Likewise, in this case, the counts were merely renumbered. The charges
themselves did not change. Petitioner was convicted of crimes for which he was indicted.
Petitioner has or had an adequate remedy at law by way of appeal to challenge any defect
in his conviction or sentence.
{¶5} Further, Petitioner’s claim in this case is barred by res judicata. “Res
judicata bars [a petitioner] from filing a successive habeas corpus petition insofar as he
raises claims that he either raised or could have raised in his previous petitions. Keith v.
Kelley, 125 Ohio St. 3d 161, 2010-Ohio-1807, 926 N.E.2d 646, ¶ 1; State ex rel. Johnson
v. Hudson, 118 Ohio St. 3d 308, 2008-Ohio-2451, 888 N.E.2d 1090; Johnson v. Mitchell
(1999), 85 Ohio St. 3d 123, 707 N.E.2d 471.” State ex rel. Johnson v. Pineda, 126 Ohio
St.3d 480, 2010-Ohio-4387, 935 N.E.2d 38, 39, ¶ 1 (2010)
{¶6} Petitioner has filed a prior Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. He could
have raised the instant issue in the prior Petition. For this reason, the instant claim is
barred by res judicata.
Richland County, Case No. 15CA90 4
{¶7} Petitioner remains incarcerated pursuant to a valid, unexpired sentence,
therefore, habeas corpus does not lie. The motion to dismiss is granted.
By Gwin, P.J.,
Delaney, J., and
Baldwin, J., concur