Case Name: The State ex rel. Wynn, Appellant, v. McFaul, Sheriff, Appellee
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1998-03-04
Citations: 81 Ohio St. 3d 193
Docket Number: No. 97-2036
Parties: The State ex rel. Wynn, Appellant, v. McFaul, Sheriff, Appellee.
Judges: Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Ohio State Reports, Third Service
Volume: 81
Pages: 193–194

Head Matter:
The State ex rel. Wynn, Appellant, v. McFaul, Sheriff, Appellee.
[Cite as State ex rel. Wynn v. McFaul (1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 193.]
(No. 97-2036
Submitted January 13, 1998
Decided March 4, 1998.)
Turhan Wynn, pro se.
Stephanie Tubbs Jones, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and Diane Smilanick, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
Wynn asserts that, the court of appeals erred in dismissing his petition. In order to withstand dismissal, a petition for a writ of habeas corpus must conform to R.C. 2725.04 and allege with particularity the extraordinary circumstances entitling the petitioner to the writ. Workman v. Shiplevy (1997), 80 Ohio St.3d 174, 685 N.E.2d 231.
The court of appeals properly dismissed Wynn's petition because he did not comply with the R.C. 2725.04(D) requirement to attach his pertinent commitment papers. Wynn did not attach a copy of the capias for his arrest, which he alleged to be the cause of his commitment. See McBroom v. Russell (1996), 77 Ohio St.3d 47, 48, 671 N.E.2d 10, 11; Bloss v. Rogers (1992), 65 Ohio St.3d 145, 146, 602 N.E.2d 602, 603 ("These commitment papers are necessary for a complete understanding of the petition. Without them the petition is fatally defective.").
Based on the foregoing, we affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.
Judgment affirmed.
Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.