2022 Ohio 35
Ohio Ct. App.2022Background
- Petitioner Ezra C. Foster, an inmate at Grafton Correctional Institution, filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus seeking release; Respondent is Warden Keith Foley.
- Foster did not pay the filing cost deposit and sought waiver under R.C. 2969.25(C) by submitting an affidavit of indigency and an inmate-account statement.
- The inmate-account statement did not show the required balance for each of the six months immediately preceding the filing (the statement covered March–August, but the petition was filed in November).
- The petition also lacked a proper verification: Foster merely signed the petition rather than making a sworn declaration before an authorized official.
- The court applied mandatory statutory requirements in R.C. 2969.25 and R.C. 2725.04 and dismissed the action for noncompliance, taxing costs to Foster.
Issues
| Issue | Foster's Argument | Foley's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Compliance with R.C. 2969.25(C) (affidavit of indigency / six-month account) | Foster filed the affidavit and account statement seeking waiver | Foster’s account statement did not cover the six months immediately preceding filing; so statutory requirement unmet | Court dismissed for failure to comply with mandatory R.C. 2969.25(C) requirement |
| Verification requirement under R.C. 2725.04 (habeas petition verification) | Petition signed by Foster suffices as verification | A formal sworn declaration before an authorized officer is required; mere signature is insufficient | Court held the petition was unverified and defective; dismissal required |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Graham v. Findlay Mun. Court, 106 Ohio St.3d 63 (2005) (R.C. 2969.25 requirements are mandatory and noncompliance warrants dismissal)
- Boles v. Knab, 129 Ohio St.3d 222 (2011) (reinforcing mandatory nature of R.C. 2969.25)
- State ex rel. Sands v. Culotta, 158 Ohio St.3d 238 (2019) (statutory filing requirements are strictly enforced)
- Russell v. Duffey, 142 Ohio St.3d 320 (2015) (dismissal upheld where inmate account statement period did not include filing date)
- Chari v. Vore, 91 Ohio St.3d 323 (2001) (defines verification as sworn declaration before authorized officer)
- Watkins v. Collins, 111 Ohio St.3d 425 (2006) (petition filed without proper verification must be dismissed)
- Youngstown Steel Door Co. v. Kosydar, 33 Ohio App.2d 277 (1973) (discussion of formal declaration/verification requirement)