COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT
                       COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
                            NO. 78345
STATE OF OHIO ex rel.         :
TIMOTHY M. NASH               :
                              :    PETITION FOR WRIT OF
     Relator                  :    INJUNCTION
                              :
     vs.                      :    MOTION NO. 21186
                              :
WILLIAM F. B. VODREY          :    JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION
ASSISTANT PROSECUTING ATTORNEY:
CUYAHOGA COUNTY PROSECUTOR'S  :
   OFFICE                     :
CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO         :
                              :
     Respondent               :
JUDGMENT                      :    WRIT DENIED.
DATE OF JOURNALIZATION        :    SEPTEMBER 27, 2000
APPEARANCES:
For relator       :           TIMOTHY M. NASH, pro se
                              #0100716
                              Cuyahoga County Jail
                              Post Office Box 5600
                              Cleveland, Ohio  44101
For respondent    :           WILLIAM D. MASON
                              Cuyahoga County Prosecutor
                              L. CHRISTOPHER FREY
                              Assistant Prosecuting Attorney
                              Justice Center, Courts Tower
                              1200 Ontario Street
                              Cleveland, Ohio  44113
                               -2-
ANN DYKE, A.J.:
     Timothy M.  Nash, relator,  commenced this  action with  the
filing of  a "Writ of  Injunction."  He  claims to be  wrongfully
indicted and is seeking an "instanter to discharge," a release from
confinement.   The  state responded  with  a Motion  for  Summary
Judgment, which we grant for the reasons argued by the prosecutor
and for those that follow.
     Release from confinement is generally sought through a writ of
habeas corpus.   To be  entitled to a  writ of  habeas corpus,  a
petitioner must show that he or she is being unlawfully restrained.
R.C. 2725.01.  If it appears that a petitioner is being  confined
pursuant to an order or judgment of a court having jurisdiction to
issue the order or judgment, the writ of habeas corpus will not be
issued.  R.C. 2725.05.  Petitioner herein does not challenge  the
jurisdiction of the committing judge, but instead raises issues as
to whether he was properly indicted.  Challenges to the  validity
and/or sufficiency of an indictment are not cognizable in a habeas
action.  Thornton v. Russell (1998), 82 Ohio St.3d 93, 694 N.E.2d
464.  Petitioner  has an adequate remedy  via appeal to test  his
indictment.   Id.  Accordingly,  respondent's motion for  summary
judgment is granted.
     Writ denied.   Costs assessed against petitioner.  Clerk  of
court to serve notice upon all parties as provided in Civ.R. 58(B).
TERRENCE O'DONNELL,J. CONCURS
                                        ANN DYKE
                                   ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE
 
.