[Cite as State v. Cole , 2020-Ohio-2704.] STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT )

STATE OF OHIO Respondent

v. AARON A. COLE Petitioner C.A. No. 29731

ORIGINAL ACTION IN HABEAS CORPUS

Dated: April 29, 2020

PER CURIAM. {¶1} Aaron A. Cole has attempted to petition this Court for a writ o f habeas corpus to order his release from custody. Because Mr. Cole has not complied with the mandatory requirements of R.C. 2725 or R.C. 2969.25, this Court must dismiss the petition. {¶2} Mr. Cole filed a handwritten document captioned “Petition for W rit of Habeas Corpus” with the Summit County Clerk of Courts. The han dwritten petition, filed on April 21, 2020, is similar, but not identical, to the petiti ons he filed a few weeks earlier
in State of Ohio v. Cole , 9th Dist. Summit No. 29713, 2020-Ohio-1591, and State of Ohio

v. Cole , 9th Dist. Summit No. 29716, 2020-Ohio-1590. As he did in his prior petitions, he identified himself as the defendant, using the caption from his criminal case, but failed to name a respondent. He alleged numerous errors in his trial court proceedings and demanded his release and dismissal of his pending criminal case

.C.A. No. 29731 Page 2 of 3 {¶3} Although Mr. Cole cited to statutes in Chapter 2725, which auth orizes a court to grant habeas corpus relief, he did not comply with the statutory requirements for filing a petition for writ of habeas corpus. He did not name t he person who has confined him, the place of his confinement, or attach a copy of his comm itment papers. R.C. 2725.04(B), (C), and (D). The Ohio Supreme Court has held that because “‘commitment papers are necessary for a complete understanding of the petiti on,’” the omission of commitment papers is a fatal defect. Brown v. Rogers , 72 Ohio St.3d 339, 341 (1995), quoting Bloss v. Rogers , 65 Ohio St.3d 145, 146 (1992). “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 o n which to make a determined judgment except, of course, the bare allegations of petitioner’s application.”

Brown at 341, quoting Bloss at 146. {¶4} In addition to other defects with his petition, Mr. Cole failed to comply with the statutory filing mandate that requires this Court to dismis s this case. R.C. 2969.25 sets forth specific filing requirements for inmates who file a civil action against a government employee or entity. As noted above, Mr. Cole identi fied the “State of Ohio” on the cover of his petition, without identifying any other res pondent, and in his petition, he challenged his confinement by the state of Ohio, a governmen t entity. Mr. Cole, incarcerated in the Summit County Jail, is an inmate. R.C. 296 9.21(C) and (D). A case must be dismissed if an inmate fails to comply with the mandato ry requirements of R.C. 2969.25 in the commencement of the action. State ex rel. Graham v. Findlay Mun. Court ,C.A. No. 29731 Page 3 of 3 106 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.”). {¶5} Mr. Cole did not pay the cost deposit required by this Court’s Local Rules. He also failed to comply with R.C. 2969.25(C), which sets forth specific requirements for an inmate who seeks to proceed without paying the cost deposit. Mr. Cole did not file an affidavit of indigency and he did not file a statement of his p risoner trust account that sets forth the balance in his inmate account for each of the precedi ng six months, as certified by the institutional cashier. Mr. Cole also failed to file an affidavit of his prior civil actions. R.C. 2969.25(A). Thus, Mr. Cole failed to comply wit h the mandatory requirements of R.C. 2969.25. {¶6} Because Mr. Cole did not comply with the statutory requirements for filing a habeas corpus action, or the mandatory requirements of R.C. 2 969.25, the case is dismissed. Costs taxed to Mr. Cole. {¶7} The clerk of courts is hereby directed to serve upon all partie s not in default notice of this judgment and its date of entry upon the journal. Civ.R. 58.

L YNNE S. CALLAHAN FOR THE COURT SCHAFER, J. TEODOSIO, J. CONCUR.
APPEARANCES: AARON A. COLE, Pro se, Petitioner.