Case Name: The State ex rel. Dozier, Appellant, v. Mack, Warden, Appellee
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1999-04-28
Citations: 85 Ohio St. 3d 368
Docket Number: No. 98-2491
Parties: The State ex rel. Dozier, Appellant, v. Mack, Warden, Appellee.
Judges: Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Ohio State Reports, Third Service
Volume: 85
Pages: 368–369

Head Matter:
The State ex rel. Dozier, Appellant, v. Mack, Warden, Appellee.
[Cite as State ex rel. Dozier v. Mack (1999), 85 Ohio St.3d 368.]
(No. 98-2491
Submitted March 31, 1999
Decided April 28, 1999.)
Michael Dozier, pro se.
Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General, and Michele M. Schoeppe, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
Dozier asserts in his sole proposition of law that the court of appeals erred in dismissing his habeas corpus petition. For the following reasons, the court of appeals correctly dismissed the petition.
First, any defect by the alleged failure to file criminal complaints is not cognizable in habeas corpus because Dozier was convicted and sentenced upon indictments rather than complaints. Thornton v. Russell (1998), 82 Ohio St.3d 93, 94, 694 N.E.2d 464, 465, citing State v. Wac (1981), 68 Ohio St.2d 84, 87, 22 O.O.3d 299, 301, 428 N.E.2d 428, 431, fn. 2.
Second, Dozier did not attach copies of all of his pertinent commitment papers to his petition. R.C. 2725.04(D); McBroom v. Russell (1996), 77 Ohio St.3d 47, 48, 671 N.E.2d 10, 11. Although the attachments to his petition refer to a third criminal sentence, commitment papers for that sentence are not attached. Smith v. Mitchell (1998), 80 Ohio St.3d 624, 625, 687 N.E.2d 749, 750.
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.