Gooden v. Bradshaw

[Cite as Gooden v. Bradshaw, 132 Ohio St.3d 45, 2012-Ohio-2013.]

GOODEN, APPELLANT, v. BRADSHAW, WARDEN, APPELLEE.
[Cite as Gooden v. Bradshaw, 132 Ohio St.3d 45, 2012-Ohio-2013.]
Habeas corpus—Sentencing error—Adequate remedy by way of appeal—Writ
denied.
(No. 2011-1943—Submitted April 24, 2012—Decided May 8, 2012.)
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Richland County, No. 11CA55,
2011-Ohio-5300.
__________________
Per Curiam.
{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals denying the
petition of appellant, Jesse L. Gooden, for a writ of habeas corpus to compel his
immediate release from prison. Gooden had an adequate remedy by way of
appeal to raise his claim of sentencing error. Roberts v. Knab, 131 Ohio St.3d 60,
2012-Ohio-56, 960 N.E.2d 457, ¶ 1. And as the court of appeals recognized,
“[t]he different numbering of the counts in the indictment and verdict forms was
neither error nor prejudicial to” Gooden. Gooden v. Bradshaw, 5th Dist. No.
11CA55, 2011-Ohio-5300, ¶ 3. See State v. Washington, 9th Dist. No. 18199,
1997 WL 775666, *7 (Nov. 26, 1997).
Judgment affirmed.
O’CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’DONNELL,
LANZINGER, CUPP, and MCGEE BROWN, JJ., concur.
__________________
Jesse L. Gooden, pro se.
Michael DeWine, Attorney General, and Gene D. Park, Assistant Attorney
General, for appellee.
______________________