In Midling v. Perrini (1968), 14 Ohio St.2d 106, 236 N.E.2d 557, the defendant argued that a collateral attack was still permissible after conviction because the State v. Cimpritz (1953) court had stated that a judgment of conviction must be declared void if it is predicated upon an insufficient indictment. Citing Wozniak, the Midling court indicated that the use of the word "void" in Cimpritz had been inappropriate; instead, the prior opinion should have stated that an insufficient indictment only renders a judgment of conviction voidable. Id., at 107.