DIXON v. BOWERMAN (2020)

{¶ 1} In 2006, appellant, William Dixon, was sentenced to an aggregate prison term of 21 years after being convicted of multiple crimes. State v. Dixon, 2d Dist. Montgomery No. 21823, 2008-Ohio-755, 2008 WL 498928, ¶ 13. His convictions and sentences were affirmed on direct appeal. Id. at ¶ 53.

{¶ 2} In 2018, Dixon filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the Sixth District Court of Appeals asserting multiple grounds for relief. State ex rel. Dixon v. Bowerman, 156 Ohio St.3d 317, 2019-Ohio-716, 126 N.E.3d 1086, ¶ 2. The Sixth District dismissed the petition, id. at ¶ 3, and this court affirmed, id. at ¶ 5.

{¶ 3} In 2019, Dixon filed another petition seeking habeas relief. The Sixth District dismissed that petition as well, holding that Dixon's claims are barred under the doctrine of res judicata and that he had an adequate remedy at law. 2019-Ohio-4435, 2019 WL 5581535, ¶ 10-11. Dixon appeals to this court as of right.

{¶ 4} Because “[r]es judicata bars petitioners from filing successive habeas corpus petitions,” Bevins v. Richard, 144 Ohio St.3d 54, 2015-Ohio-2832, 40 N.E.3d 1108, ¶ 4, we affirm. Dixon's motion for leave to file an amended brief is denied.

Judgment affirmed.

Per Curiam.

O'Connor, C.J., and Kennedy, French, Fischer, DeWine, Donnelly, and Stewart, JJ., concur.