VanBUSKIRK, Appellant, v. WINGARD (1998)

Supreme Court of Ohio.

VanBUSKIRK, Appellant, v. WINGARD, Warden, Appellee.
CHILDERS, Appellant, v. WINGARD, Warden, Appellee.
MALONE, Appellant, v. WINGARD, Warden, Appellee.
SPROAT, Appellant, v. WINGARD, Warden, Appellee.
MORTEMORE, Appellant, v. WINGARD, Warden, Appellee.

Nos. 97-1160, 97-1281, 97-1409, 97-1565 and 97-1857.

Decided: January 07, 1998

Gerald Van Buskirk, pro se. Thomas J. Childers, pro se. Douglas Malone, pro se. Stephen L. Sproat, pro se. Steven R. Mortemore, pro se. Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General, and Donald Gary Keyser, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Per Curiam. We affirm the judgments of the court of appeals dismissing appellants' petitions. Appellants' claims merely attacked the validity and sufficiency of their indictments. Consequently, their claims should have been raised by direct appeal rather than habeas corpus. State ex rel. Beaucamp v. Lazaroff (1997), 77 Ohio St.3d 237, 238, 673 N.E.2d 1273, 1274. Further, contrary to appellants' assertions, a grand jury foreperson's failure to sign an indictment does not deprive the trial court of jurisdiction or otherwise entitle a criminal defendant convicted and sentenced on the indictment to a writ of habeas corpus. State ex rel. Justice v. McMackin (1990), 53 Ohio St.3d 72, 73, 558 N.E.2d 1183.

Judgments affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

MOYER, C.J., and DOUGLAS, RESNICK, FRANCIS E. SWEENEY, Sr., PFEIFER, COOK and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network