JULIE HAUTZENROEDER v. MICHAEL DEWINE, Ohio Attorney General - Articles

All Content


Posted by: Landry Butler on Apr 13, 2018

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1:

ARGUED: Wendy R. Calaway, THE LAW OFFICE OF WENDY R. CALAWAY, CO., L.P.A., Cincinnati, Ohio, for Appellant. M. Scott Criss, OFFICE OF THE OHIO ATTORNEY GENERAL, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellee.

Attorneys 2:

ON BRIEF: Wendy R. Calaway, THE LAW OFFICE OF WENDY R. CALAWAY, CO., L.P.A., Cincinnati, Ohio, for Appellant. Stephanie L. Watson, OFFICE OF THE OHIO ATTORNEY GENERAL, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellee.

Judge(s): COLE, Chief Judge; SILER and COOK, Circuit Judges.

Court Appealed: Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio at Cincinnati.

COOK, Circuit Judge. Due to her conviction for sexual battery, Julie Hautzenroeder must forever comply with Ohio’s sex offender registration and notification laws. After her release from prison and community control, Hautzenroeder filed a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging her conviction with its attendant ongoing reporting burden. The district court dismissed the petition, deciding that it lacked jurisdiction under § 2254 because Hautzenroeder was no longer “in custody.” Hautzenroeder timely appealed, and we AFFIRM.