[U] State Ex Rel Santner v. Mitchell

Unpublished opinion 1. Mark J. Santner, pro se, appeals from an order dismissing his petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus. He claims that the trial court should not have dismissed his petition, that he was denied equal protection and due process, and that increasing his sentence while he was already serving it violated double jeopardy. Because the facts and circumstances under this case do not satisfy the standard required to maintain a writ of habeas corpus,we affirm. 2. The crux of this appeal is Santner's challenge to the Department of Corrections' jurisdiction over him with respect to a parole hold in a case he claims he was discharged from. He suggests that he was discharged from case #99CT3616 before revocation and yet, this case was added to his felony prison structure. As the State points out, Administrative Law Judge Kathleen R. Kalashian sets forth a well-reasoned analysis rejecting his jurisdictional claim: