State ex rel. Steele v. Foley ( 2020 )


Menu:
  • [Cite as State ex rel. Steele v. Foley, 
    2020-Ohio-5128
    .]
    STATE OF OHIO                      )                       IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
    )ss:                    NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
    COUNTY OF LORAIN                   )
    STATE EX REL. TRACEE STEELE
    Petitioner                                         C.A. No.   20CA011675
    v.
    KEITH FOLEY, WARDEN                                        ORIGINAL ACTION IN
    HABEAS CORPUS
    Respondent
    Dated: November 2, 2020
    PER CURIAM.
    {¶1}     Tracee Steele has petitioned this Court for a writ of habeas corpus to order Warden
    Keith Foley to release him from custody. Warden Foley has moved to dismiss because Mr. Steele
    previously raised the same claim in this Court and in the Ohio Supreme Court, so res judicata
    bars further consideration. Mr. Steele responded to the motion to dismiss. Because Mr. Steele
    failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of R.C. 2969.25(A), this Court must dismiss
    this case.
    {¶2}     R.C. 2969.25 sets forth specific filing requirements for inmates who file a civil
    action against a government employee or entity. Warden Foley is a government employee and
    Mr. Steele, incarcerated in the Grafton Reintegration Center, is an inmate. R.C. 2969.21(C) and
    (D). A case must be dismissed if the inmate fails to comply with the mandatory requirements of
    R.C. 2969.25 in the commencement of the action. State ex rel. Graham v. Findlay Mun. Court,
    C.A. No. 20CA011675
    Page 2 of 4
    
    106 Ohio St.3d 63
    , 
    2005-Ohio-3671
    , ¶ 6 (“The requirements of R.C. 2969.25 are mandatory, and
    failure to comply with them subjects an inmate’s action to dismissal.”).
    {¶3}    Mr. Steele failed to comply with R.C. 2969.25(A) which requires the filing of an
    affidavit of prior civil actions including specific, mandatory, information. The affidavit must
    contain a description of each civil action or appeal of a civil action that the inmate has filed in
    the previous five years in any state or federal court. For each action or appeal, the affidavit must
    contain the case name, the case number, the court in which the case was filed, the name of each
    party, a brief description of the nature of the action or appeal, and the outcome. R.C.
    2969.25(A)(1) through (4).
    {¶4}    Mr. Steele filed an affidavit of prior civil actions. He used a form that contained
    the following language:
    1.      In the previous five years, I have/have not filed any civil actions or appeals
    of a civil action in state or federal court;
    2.      During the last five years, I have/have not filed any civil actions, and no
    civil actions have been filed during the last three years.
    Although it appears the form was intended for the affiant to select or somehow indicate “have”
    or “have not” in each sentence, nothing was circled or crossed out. Mr. Steele also typed the
    name of one case after each of these sentences:
    State ex rel. Steele v. Eppinger, 
    147 Ohio St.3d 404
     (Habeas Corpus)
    State ex rel. Steele v. McClelland, 
    154 Ohio St. 3d 574
    . (Prohibition / Mandamus
    (Sic.)
    {¶5}    Mr. Steele’s affidavit of prior civil actions failed to comply with the mandatory
    requirements of R.C. 2969.25(A).           Although the affidavit identified the case name, and
    C.A. No. 20CA011675
    Page 3 of 4
    parenthetically noted the first case involved habeas corpus and the second sought prohibition and
    mandamus relief, Mr. Steele did not comply with the other requirements of R.C. 2969.25(A). He
    failed to indicate the court in which the case was brought, the case number, the name of each
    party, a brief description of the nature of the action, and the outcome. R.C. 2969.25(A)(1)
    through (4).
    {¶6}    The Supreme Court has held that “[c]ompliance with R.C. 2969.25(A) is
    mandatory, and failure to comply will warrant dismissal.” Robinson v. Fender, 
    159 Ohio St.3d 99
    , 
    2020-Ohio-458
    , quoting State v. Henton, 
    146 Ohio St.3d 9
    , 
    2016-Ohio-1518
    , ¶ 3. The
    “statute requires strict compliance.” 
    Id.
     Where the affidavit of prior actions does not provide all
    of the information required by R.C. 2969.25, the statute requires dismissal. State ex rel. Ware v.
    Walsh, 
    159 Ohio St.3d 120
    , 
    2020-Ohio-769
    , ¶ 4 (dismissal required where the affidavit of prior
    actions did “not provide any information describing the outcome of the actions as required by
    R.C. 2969.25(A)(4).”).
    {¶7}    Because Mr. Steele did not comply with the mandatory requirements of R.C.
    2969.25, the case is dismissed. Costs taxed to Mr. Steele. 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. Civ.R. 58.
    LYNNE S. CALLAHAN
    FOR THE COURT
    HENSAL, J.
    SCHAFER, J.
    CONCUR.
    C.A. No. 20CA011675
    Page 4 of 4
    APPEARANCES:
    TRACEE STEELE, Pro se, Petitioner.
    DAVE YOST, Ohio Attorney General, and DANIEL J. BENOIT, Associate Assistant Attorney
    General, for Respondent.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 20CA011675

Judges: Per Curiam

Filed Date: 11/2/2020

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 11/2/2020