.]
COURT OF APPEALS
RICHLAND COUNTY, OHIO
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DARLLEL B. ORR JUDGES:
Hon. Sheila G. Farmer, P. J.
Petitioner Hon. W. Scott Gwin, J.
Hon. John W. Wise, J.
-vsCase No. 15 CA 78
ALAN LAZAROFF, WARDEN
Respondent OPINION
CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Habeas Corpus
JUDGMENT: Dismissed
DATE OF JUDGMENT ENTRY: June 8, 2016
APPEARANCES:
For Petitioner For Respondent
DARLLEL B. ORR, PRO SE MICHAEL DEWINE
MANSFIELD CORR. INSTITUTION OHIO ATTORNEY GENERAL
Post Office Box 788 JONATHAN R. KHOURI
Mansfield, Ohio 44901 ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL
150 East Gay Street, 16th Floor
Columbus, Ohio 43215
Richland County, Case No. 15 CA 78 2
Wise, J.
{¶1} Petitioner, Darllel B. Orr, has filed a petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
alleging unlawful detention based upon the contention his constitutional rights were
violated due to a fabricated affidavit making the search warrant defective. Respondent
has filed a motion to dismiss for failing to comply with the procedural requirements for a
habeas corpus petition and for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
Petitioner has filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings.
{¶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, “Such a failure is fatal to a petition for habeas corpus.”
State ex rel. Arroyo v. Sloan,
, 57, ¶
3 (2015).
{¶4} “[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,
, 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).
Richland County, Case No. 15 CA 78 3
{¶5} Petitioner’s failure to attach all necessary commitment papers to his initial
petition is fatal, and the petition must be dismissed.
{¶6} For these reasons, Petitioner’s petition for writ of habeas corpus is
dismissed.
By: Wise, J.
Farmer, P. J., and
Gwin, J., concur.
JWW/d 0511
