Forrest-Bey v. May ( 2020 )

[Cite as Forrest-Bey v. May, 2020-Ohio-3482.]
COURT OF APPEALS
RICHLAND COUNTY, OHIO
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
CHRISTOPHER M. FORREST-BEY, SR. JUDGES:
Hon. William B. Hoffman, P.J.
Petitioner Hon. Patricia A. Delaney, J.
Hon. Earle E. Wise, Jr., J.
-vs-
Case No. 2020 CA 0044
HAROLD MAY
Respondent O P I N IO N
CHARACTER OF PROCEEDINGS: Writ of Habeas Corpus
JUDGMENT: Dismissed
DATE OF JUDGMENT ENTRY: June 24, 2020
APPEARANCES:
For Petitioner For Respondent
CHRISTOPHER M. FORREST-BEY, SR. DAVID YOST
A763516 Richland Correctional Institution Ohio Attorney General
1001 Olivesburg Road
P.O. Box 8107 JERRI L. FOSNAUGHT
Mansfield, Ohio 44901 Assistant Attorney General
150 East Gay Street, 16th Floor
Columbus, Ohio 43215
Hoffman, P.J.
{¶1} On May 18, 2020, Petitioner, Christopher M. Forrest-Bey, Sr., filed a Petition
for Writ of Habeas Corpus against Harold May, Warden of the Richland Correctional
Institution. Mr. Forrest-Bey sets forth several grounds in support of his petition and based
upon these grounds, he claims he should be released from prison. The grounds asserted
by Mr. Forrest-Bey include: (1) the trial court lacked jurisdiction because of an unsigned
warrant; (2) the trial court lacked jurisdiction over arrest warrants issued without any
probable cause determination; and (3) the trial court lacked jurisdiction over arrest
warrants issued by a clerk who works for the police department.
{¶2} Due to the following deficiencies, Mr. Forrest-Bey’s petition is not sufficient
to maintain an action for habeas corpus and his petition is sua sponte dismissed. First,
the petition is not verified as required by R.C. 2725.04. The failure to verify the petition
requires dismissal. State v. Vore, 91 Ohio St.3d 323, 327, 744 N.E.2d 763 (2001); State
ex rel. Crigger v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth., 82 Ohio St.3d 270, 272, 695 N.E.2d 254 (1998).
Second, Mr. Forrest-Bey did not comply with R.C. 2725.04(D), which requires a copy of
the commitment or cause of detention be attached to the petition for writ of habeas corpus.
Without the commitment papers, the writ of habeas corpus is fatally defective. Brown v.
Rogers, 72 Ohio St.3d 339, 341, 650 N.E.2d 422 (1995).
{¶3} Third, Mr. Forrest-Bey filed an affidavit of indigency, but failed to include
required documentation for his affidavit of indigency in violation of R.C. 2969.25(C)(1).
Section (C)(1) requires a statement that sets forth the balance in the inmate’s account for
each of the preceding six months, as certified by the institutional cashier. The statutory
requirements contained in R.C. 2969.25(C) are mandatory and failure to comply subjects
Mr. Forrest-Bey’s petition to dismissal. Al’Shahid v. Cook, 144 Ohio St.3d 15, 2015-Ohio-
2079, 40 N.E.3d 1073, ¶ 9.
{¶4} For the foregoing reasons, we sua sponte dismiss Mr. Forrest-Bey’s Petition
for Writ of Habeas Corpus. The clerk of courts is hereby directed to serve upon all parties
not in default notice of this judgment and its date of entry upon the journal.
PETITION SUA SPONTE DISMISSED.
COSTS TO PETITIONER.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
By: Hoffman, P.J.
Delaney, J. and
Wise, Earle, J. concur