Opinion
Case No. 11CAD100088
01-30-2012
KEVIN MICHAEL STEWART Petitioner v. STATE OF OHIO Respondent
For Petitioner KEVIN M. STEWART For Respondent CAROL HAMILTON O'BRIEN KYLE ROHRER
JUDGES:
Hon. , P.J.
Hon. John W. Wise, J.
Hon. Julie A. Edwards, J.
OPINION
CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Writ of Habeas Corpus
JUDGMENT: Dismissed
APPEARANCES:
For Petitioner
KEVIN M. STEWART
For Respondent
CAROL HAMILTON O'BRIEN
KYLE ROHRER
Hoffman, P.J.
(¶1) Petitioner, Kevin Michael Stewart, has filed a petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus alleging unlawful detention based upon his contention he received an unlawful sentence.
(¶2) A review of the complaint reveals Petitioner has failed to attach the necessary commitment papers in compliance with R.C. 2725.04(D).
(¶3) The Supreme Court has held failure to comply with this requirement is a fatal defect which cannot be cured, "[C]ommitment papers are necessary for a complete understanding of the petition. Without them, the petition is fatally defective. When a petition is presented to a court that does not comply with R.C. 2725.04(D), there is no showing of how the commitment was procured and there is nothing before the court on which to make a determined judgment except, of course, the bare allegations of petitioner's application." Bloss v. Rogers, 65 Ohio St.3d 145, 602 N.E.2d 602. See also, Boyd v. Money, 82 Ohio St.3d 388, wherein the Supreme Court held, "Habeas corpus petitioner's failure to attach pertinent commitment papers to his petition rendered petition fatally defective, and petitioner's subsequent attachment of commitment papers to his post-judgment motion did not cure the defect." R.C. § 2725.04(D).
(¶4) We find the failure to include all pertinent commitment papers has made a complete understanding of the Petition impossible.
(¶5) Further, R.C. 2725.04 requires that petitions for habeas corpus be verified. The instant petition does not contain an affidavit of verity. The Supreme Court of Ohio has consistently upheld the dismissal of habeas corpus petitions which are not verified. Hughley v. Saunders (2009), 123 Ohio St.3d 90, 2009-Ohio-4089, 914 N.E.2d 370.
(¶6) Finally, Petitioner has further failed to comply with R.C. 2969.25 by failing to file an affidavit detailing his prior civil filings. The Supreme Court has held, "The requirements of R.C. 2969.25 are mandatory, and failure to comply with them subjects an inmate's action to dismissal." State ex rel. White v. Bechtel, 99 Ohio St.3d 11, 2003-Ohio-2262, 788 N.E.2d 634, ¶ 5.
(¶7) For these reasons, Petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed. By: Hoffman, P.J. Wise, J. and Edwards, J. concur
William B. Hoffman
HON. WILLIAM B. HOFFMAN
John W. Wise
HON. JOHN W. WISE
Julie A. Edwards
HON. JULIE A. EDWARDS
KEVIN MICHAEL STEWART Petitioner
v.
STATE OF OHIO Respondent
JUDGMENT ENTRY
Case No. 11CAD100088
For the reasons stated in our accompanying Opinion, Petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed.
William B. Hoffman
HON. WILLIAM B. HOFFMAN
John W. Wise
HON. JOHN W. WISE
Julie A. Edwards
HON. JULIE A. EDWARDS