Lowe v. Smith

2025 Ohio 4541 · Supreme Court of Ohio · October 2, 2025 · No. 2025-0064

Summary

This Supreme Court of Ohio per curiam opinion affirms the dismissal of Dennis Ray Lowe’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging his 2002 aggravated murder convictions. The court held that any procedural irregularity in the assignment of a visiting judge to preside over his trial rendered his convictions voidable rather than void, meaning the trial court retained subject-matter jurisdiction. Additionally, the court found that Lowe waived any claim regarding the judge's improper assignment by failing to raise a timely objection at trial or on direct appeal. Consequently, Lowe failed to state a valid claim for habeas relief.

Court
Supreme Court of Ohio
Writing for the Court
Kennedy, C.J.; Fischer, J.; Dewine, J.; Brunner, J.; Deters, J.; Hawkins, J.; Shanahan, J.
Jurisdiction
Ohio
Decision date
October 2, 2025
Docket number
2025-0064
Procedural posture
Appeal from the Seventh District Court of Appeals judgment granting the warden's motion to dismiss the petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
Standard of review
de novo
Precedential value
published
Parties
Lowe v. Smith
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

habeas corpuspost-conviction reliefappellate proceduresubject matter jurisdictioncivil procedure

Practice areas

criminal procedurepost-conviction relief

Questions Presented

  1. Whether a procedural irregularity in the assignment of a visiting judge renders a conviction void or merely voidable
  2. Whether the failure to timely object to the visiting judge’s assignment waives the issue and bars habeas relief
  3. Whether the Seventh District Court of Appeals’ dismissal under Civ.R. 12(b)(6) is appropriate

Holdings

  1. Procedural irregularities in the assignment of a visiting judge render the conviction and sentence voidable, not void, because the trial court retains subject‑matter jurisdiction.
  2. Failure to timely raise the procedural error waives the issue, so the petition does not state a valid claim for habeas relief and the dismissal is proper.

Key quotations

In a court that possesses subject‑matter jurisdiction, procedural irregularities in the transfer of a case to a visiting judge affect the court’s jurisdiction over the particular case and render the judgment voidable, not void. (¶ 9)
Because Lowe does not state a claim that entitles him to a writ of habeas corpus, we conclude that the Seventh District Court of Appeals correctly granted the warden’s motion to dismiss, and we affirm the court’s judgment dismissing Lowe’s petition. (¶ 12)

Factual background

Dennis Ray Lowe was indicted for aggravated murder and attempted aggravated murder in 2002. A visiting judge, Mary Cacioppo, presided over the bench trial and sentenced Lowe to consecutive life terms and additional years. Lowe later claimed the judge was improperly assigned and thus lacked jurisdiction, seeking habeas relief.

Procedural history

Lowe was convicted in 2002 by a visiting judge. He later filed a habeas petition alleging the visiting judge lacked jurisdiction. The Seventh District Court of Appeals dismissed the petition under Civ.R. 12(b)(6). The Ohio Supreme Court reviewed de novo and affirmed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…