Title: Al'Shahid v. Cook

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as 
Al’shahid v. Cook, Slip Opinion No. 2015-Ohio-2079.] 
 
 
 
 
 
NOTICE 
This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in 
an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports.  Readers are requested 
to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 
65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typographical or 
other formal errors in the opinion, in order that corrections may be 
made before the opinion is published. 
 
SLIP OPINION NO. 2015-OHIO-2079 
AL’SHAHID, APPELLANT, v. COOK, WARDEN, APPELLEE. 
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it 
may be cited as Al’shahid v. Cook, Slip Opinion No. 2015-Ohio-2079.] 
Habeas corpus—Failure to attach commitment papers as required by R.C. 
2725.04(D)—Failure to document balance of inmate account for six 
months preceding filing of habeas petition—R.C. 2969.25(C)(1)—
Dismissal of petition affirmed. 
(No. 2014-1686—Submitted February 3, 2015—Decided June 4, 2015.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Pickaway County, No. 14CA9. 
_____________________ 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} We affirm the Fourth District Court of Appeals’ dismissal of 
petitioner-appellant Curtis Al’shahid’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus 
because of procedural deficiencies in his petition. 
 
 
Supreme Court of Ohio 
 
2
Facts and procedural history 
{¶ 2} Al’shahid was convicted of multiple felony offenses in 1990.  He 
was granted parole in 2004.  He was convicted of three new offenses while on 
parole. He was sentenced to a new nine-year aggregate term for the new offenses 
on December 28, 2005. 
{¶ 3} Al’shahid was incarcerated for the new offenses in January 2006, 
and he alleges that unbeknownst to him, he was a member of the class of parolees 
entitled to a parole-revocation mitigation hearing under the consent decree upheld 
in Kellogg v. Shoemaker, 927 F.Supp. 244 (S.D.Ohio 1996).  He alleges that he 
was not informed of his right to a hearing.  However, he did sign a Kellogg waiver 
on January 13, 2006. 
{¶ 4} Before the expiration of Al’shahid’s nine-year sentence, the parole 
board continued his sentence in the 1990 case for three years without a Kellogg 
hearing and, he alleges, without his parole on the 1990 offenses being revoked.  
He asserts that the document given to him by his case manager purporting to 
document his Kellogg waiver is inaccurate on key points. 
{¶ 5} Al’shahid filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus on June 19, 
2014, and on July 25, 2014, respondent-appellee, Brian Cook, warden of the 
Pickaway Correctional Institution, filed a motion for summary judgment.  The 
motion asserted that Al’shahid’s petition had various fatal defects and that he had 
waived his Kellogg rights. In response, Al’shahid filed a memorandum arguing 
that the petition was sufficient and that the Kellogg waiver was obtained under 
false pretenses. 
{¶ 6} The court of appeals dismissed the case.  Al’shahid appealed. 
Analysis 
{¶ 7} Al’shahid first argues that the court erred in dismissing his case 
under Civ.R. 12(B)(6), when only a motion for summary judgment under Civ.R. 
56 had been filed.  However, a court may dismiss a habeas petition sua sponte if 
January Term, 2015 
 
3
the petition does not contain a facially valid claim.  State ex rel. Crigger v. Ohio 
Adult Parole Auth., 82 Ohio St.3d 270, 271, 695 N.E.2d 254 (1998). 
{¶ 8} Cook argues here, and the court below held, that Al’shahid failed to 
attach all his commitment papers to his petition in violation of R.C. 2725.04(D).  
Such a failure is fatal to a petition for habeas corpus. State ex rel. McCuller v. 
Callahan, 98 Ohio St.3d 307, 2003-Ohio-858, 784 N.E.2d 108, ¶ 4, citing State ex 
rel. Johnson v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr., 95 Ohio St.3d 70, 71, 765 N.E.2d 
356 (2002), Malone v. Lane, 96 Ohio St.3d 415, 2002-Ohio-4908, 775 N.E.2d 
527, at ¶ 6, and Chari v. Vore, 91 Ohio St.3d 323, 328, 744 N.E.2d 763 (2001).  
As pointed out by the court of appeals, the respondent presented evidence that 
Al’shahid had several convictions before the 1990 offenses.  Without the 
commitment papers from those earlier offenses, that court was unable to calculate 
Al’shahid’s actual maximum prison term.  Al’shahid’s petition therefore violates 
R.C. 2725.04(D). 
{¶ 9} Moreover, Al’shahid also failed to include proper documentation for 
his affidavit of indigency in violation of R.C. 2969.25(C)(1).  We have held that 
the requirements of R.C. 2969.25(C) are mandatory and that failure to comply 
subjects the complaint to dismissal.  Hazel v. Knab, 130 Ohio St.3d 22, 2011-
Ohio-4608, 955 N.E.2d 378, ¶ 1, and cases cited therein.  Moreover, later filing of 
the proper statement does not cure the defect.  Fuqua v. Williams, 100 Ohio St.3d 
211, 2003-Ohio-5533, 797 N.E.2d 982, ¶ 9. 
{¶ 10} While Al’shahid did provide an affidavit of indigency and a 
statement of his inmate account, the statement does not set forth the balance of his 
inmate account for the preceding six months, as required by the statute.  Rather, it 
covers the months of October 2013 through March 2014, while his petition was 
filed in June 2014.  This renders his petition fatally defective.  When the 
petitioner’s cashier statement does not set forth the account balance for the month 
immediately preceding his mandamus complaint, his failure to comply with R.C. 
Supreme Court of Ohio 
 
4
2969.25(C)(1) warrants dismissal of the complaint.  State ex rel. Pamer v. Collier, 
108 Ohio St.3d 492, 2006-Ohio-1507, 844 N.E.2d 842, ¶ 5, citing State ex rel. 
Foster v. Belmont Cty. Court of Common Pleas, 107 Ohio St.3d 195, 2005-Ohio-
6184, 837 N.E.2d 777, ¶ 5. 
{¶ 11} Al’shahid’s complaint is deficient and the court of appeals was 
correct in dismissing his case. 
Judgment affirmed. 
O’CONNOR, C.J., and LANZINGER, KENNEDY, FRENCH, and O’NEILL, JJ., 
concur. 
O’DONNELL, J., concurs in judgment only. 
PFEIFER, J., dissents, would reverse the court of appeals and grant the writ. 
_____________________ 
 
Curtis Al’shahid, pro se. 
 
Michael DeWine, Attorney General, and Maura O’Neill Jaite, Assistant 
Attorney General, for appellee. 
_____________________