Jefferson v. Bunting (Slip Opinion), 140 Ohio St. 3d 62

Jefferson was convicted in 1975 of aggravated robbery (7–25 years) and later, after a second trial, convicted of aggravated murder and sentenced to life on July 21, 1975.
He was paroled on the aggravated-robbery sentence in 1981 and received a final unconditional release in 1982.
In 1985 Jefferson was indicted on new charges; the court requested the 1975 sentencing papers be sent to the correctional institution; Jefferson was sentenced in that new case to 7–15 years, to run concurrently with the 1975 life sentence.
Jefferson filed a habeas petition in May 2013 claiming he had served the sentence in the 1985 case and was being held solely pursuant to a recommitment under the 1975 case, which he contended was invalid because he had received a final parole release.
The warden moved to dismiss on res judicata grounds attaching documents; the court of appeals granted the motion three days after filing without giving Jefferson an opportunity to respond.
The Supreme Court of Ohio reversed, concluding the court of appeals improperly relied on materials outside the petition and failed to follow the required procedure for converting a dismissal motion into a summary-judgment matter and providing notice.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether res judicata could support dismissal under Civ.R. 12(B)	Jefferson argues the 1975 recommitment was invalid because he had an unconditional release; he sought habeas relief	Bunting argued res judicata barred the petition and attached records to support dismissal	Res judicata is an affirmative defense not properly decided on a Civ.R. 12(B) motion; dismissal on that basis was improper
Whether the court could consider documents outside the petition on a 12(B)(6) motion	Jefferson relied on the face of his petition	Bunting relied on exhibits attached to the motion to dismiss	Courts may not rely on materials outside the complaint when deciding Civ.R. 12(B)(6); exhibits attached to dismissal motion are excluded unless converted to summary judgment
Proper procedure when dismissal depends on outside documents	Jefferson had no chance to contest the attached documents	Bunting relied on them to show res judicata	When outside documents control the res judicata defense, the court must convert the motion to one for summary judgment and give notice and opportunity to respond
Adequacy of time given to respond to the motion	Jefferson received no meaningful response period	Bunting received relief three days after filing his motion	Granting the motion after three days violated rules requiring at least the response period for Civ.R. 12(B) and Civ.R. 56(C); reversal and remand required

State ex rel. Freeman v. Morris, 62 Ohio St.3d 107 (res judicata is an affirmative defense and not a proper ground for dismissal under Civ.R. 12)
State ex rel. Fuqua v. Alexander, 79 Ohio St.3d 206 (courts may not rely on materials outside the complaint to decide a Civ.R. 12(B)(6) motion)
State ex rel. Parker v. Tate, 86 Ohio St.3d 625 (prohibition on considering exhibits attached to dismissal motion applies in habeas cases)
State ex rel. Nelson v. Russo, 89 Ohio St.3d 227 (courts must allow proper response time for Civ.R. 12(B) and Civ.R. 56(C) procedures)