The State ex rel. Kerr, Appellant,
Turner, Warden, Appellee.
Submitted August 6, 2019
from the Court of Appeals for Marion County, No. 9-19-06.
Kerr, pro se.
Yost, Attorney General, and Stephanie L. Watson, Assistant
Attorney General, for appellee.
1} Appellant, Jeremy Kerr, an inmate at North
Central Correction Institution, appeals the dismissal of his
complaint for a writ of habeas corpus. We affirm.
2} Kerr was convicted in the Wood County Court of
Common Pleas of four counts of forgery and four counts of
tampering with evidence. State v. Kerr, Wood C.P.
No. 2012CR0389. In June 2013, the trial court sentenced him
to an aggregate prison term of seven years and eight months.
3} On January 28, 2019, he filed a petition for a
writ of habeas corpus in the Third District Court of Appeals
against appellee, Warden Neil Turner. The court of appeals
dismissed the complaint on the grounds that it failed to
state a claim for habeas relief and was barred by res
4} Kerr appealed.
5} A writ of habeas corpus "is warranted in
certain extraordinary circumstances 'where there is an
unlawful restraint of a person's liberty and there is no
adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law.'"
Johnson v. Timmerman-Cooper, 93 Ohio St.3d 614, 616,
757 N.E.2d 1153 (2001), quoting Pegan v. Crawmer, 76
Ohio St.3d 97, 99, 666 N.E.2d 1091 (1996). With few
exceptions, habeas corpus will lie only to challenge the
jurisdiction of the sentencing court. State ex rel.
Quillen v. Wainwright, 152 Ohio St.3d 566,
2018-Ohio-922, 99 N.E.3d 360, ¶ 6.
6} Kerr's complaint challenges his convictions
under four theories, none of which is cognizable in habeas
corpus. First, he argues that the prosecution failed to prove
every element of the charged forgery offenses. But habeas
corpus is not available to challenge the sufficiency of the
evidence. State ex rel. Tarr v. Williams, 112 Ohio
St.3d 51, 2006-Ohio-6368, 857 N.E.2d 1225, ¶ 4.
7} Next, Kerr asserts that the evidence did not
establish that the crimes occurred in Wood County. But an
alleged failure to prove venue "must be raised by
appeal" and is not a "question cognizable in
habeas corpus." Cook v. ...