Title: Tisdale v. Eberlin

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Cite as Tisdale v. Eberlin, 114 Ohio St.3d 201, 2007-Ohio-3833.] 
 
 
TISDALE, APPELLANT, v. EBERLIN, WARDEN, APPELLEE. 
[Cite as Tisdale v. Eberlin, 114 Ohio St.3d 201, 2007-Ohio-3833.] 
Appeal from dismissal of petition for a writ of habeas corpus — Failure to attach 
pertinent commitment papers — Adequate remedy at law available — 
Judgment affirmed. 
(No. 2007-0533 — Submitted July 10, 2007 — Decided August 15, 2007.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Belmont County,  
No. 06 BE 63, 2007-Ohio-1409. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} This is an appeal from a judgment dismissing a petition for a writ 
of habeas corpus.  Because the petitioner failed to attach all of his pertinent 
commitment papers, and because he had an adequate remedy in the ordinary 
course of law to raise his speedy-trial claim, we affirm. 
{¶ 2} The Columbiana County Court of Common Pleas convicted 
appellant, Khabir A. Tisdale, of two counts of trafficking in drugs, one count of 
attempted illegal conveyance of prohibited items onto the grounds of a detention 
facility, and one count of possession of drugs and sentenced him to prison.  The 
Jefferson County Court of Common Pleas convicted Tisdale of one count of 
possession of drugs and sentenced him to prison. 
{¶ 3} In December 2006, Tisdale filed a petition in the Court of Appeals 
for Belmont County for a writ of habeas corpus to compel his immediate release 
from prison.  Tisdale claimed that he was entitled to the writ because his speedy-
trial rights under R.C. 2941.401 had been violated.  However, Tisdale did not 
attach a copy of the sentencing entry for his Jefferson County conviction.  
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
Appellee, Belmont Correctional Institution Warden Michele Eberlin, filed a 
motion to dismiss the petition.  The court of appeals dismissed the petition. 
{¶ 4} In his appeal as of right, Tisdale asserts that the court of appeals 
erred in dismissing his habeas corpus petition. 
{¶ 5} For the following reasons, however, the court of appeals properly 
dismissed the petition. 
{¶ 6} Tisdale’s petition is fatally defective and subject to dismissal 
because he failed to attach copies of all of his pertinent commitment papers.  State 
ex rel. Winnick v. Gansheimer, 112 Ohio St.3d 149, 2006-Ohio-6521, 858 N.E.2d 
409, ¶ 5; R.C. 2725.04(D).  Tisdale attached the sentencing entries for his 
Columbiana County convictions but failed to attach the sentencing entry for his 
Jefferson County conviction.  Tisdale erroneously relies on Watkins v. Collins, 
111 Ohio St.3d 425, 2006-Ohio-5082, 857 N.E.2d 78, ¶ 38, to claim that the 
foregoing general rule is inapplicable.  Watkins is inapposite, because unlike the 
petitioners in that case, Tisdale did not attach a stipulation of the parties agreeing 
to all of the pertinent facts. 
{¶ 7} Moreover, a claimed violation of a right to a speedy trial is not 
cognizable in habeas corpus.  Kelley v. Wilson, 103 Ohio St.3d 201, 2004-Ohio-
4883, 814 N.E.2d 1222, ¶ 15.  This rule applies where the claimed violation is ─ 
as here ─ based upon noncompliance with R.C. 2941.401.  Jackson v. Wilson, 100 
Ohio St.3d 315, 2003-Ohio-6112, 798 N.E.2d 1086, ¶ 6-7 (prisoner has adequate 
remedy at law by way of motion to dismiss indictment and appeal to raise claimed 
violation of speedy-trial rights under R.C. 2941.401); State ex rel. Bowling v. 
Hamilton Cty. Court of Common Pleas (1970), 24 Ohio St.2d 158, 53 O.O.2d 
355, 265 N.E.2d 296. 
{¶ 8} Based on the foregoing, we affirm the judgment of the court of 
appeals.  Dismissal was warranted because Tisdale’s petition was fatally defective 
and failed to state a claim cognizable in habeas corpus. 
January Term, 2007 
3 
Judgment affirmed. 
 
MOYER, C.J., PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’CONNOR, O’DONNELL, 
LANZINGER and CUPP, JJ., concur. 
__________________ 
 
Khabir A. Tisdale, pro se. 
 
Marc Dann, Attorney General, and Stuart A. Cole, Assistant Attorney 
General, for appellee. 
______________________