Zayas v. State
2016 Ohio 8038
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Petitioner Jose M. Zayas filed a pro se habeas corpus petition seeking immediate release from the Mahoning County Jail after an August 6, 2016 arrest and 24 days in custody without a judicial appearance.
- Zayas alleged he was arrested without a warrant and detained pending action by the Commonwealth of Kentucky under the Uniform Extradition Act.
- The State moved to dismiss and attached a Mahoning County grand jury indictment charging Zayas with carrying a concealed weapon (felony 4) and having a weapon while under disability (felony 3).
- The court reviewed the petition and the State’s attachments.
- The court dismissed the petition for two independent reasons: (1) Zayas failed to file the mandatory R.C. 2969.25 affidavit listing prior civil actions; and (2) Ohio law (R.C. 2963.17) permits the state to hold an indicted person pending prosecution rather than immediately surrendering him for extradition.
- Costs were taxed to Petitioner; judgment of dismissal affirmed by the panel.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Failure to comply with R.C. 2969.25 affidavit requirement | Zayas did not include the required affidavit but sought habeas relief nonetheless | State argued R.C. 2969.25 applies and noncompliance requires dismissal | Court dismissed petition for failure to file the mandatory affidavit (R.C. 2969.25 is mandatory) |
| Legality of continued detention pending extradition/transfer | Zayas claimed unlawful detention without prompt judicial appearance or extradition proceedings | State produced indictment and argued R.C. 2963.17 allows Ohio to hold a person indicted in Ohio until tried or convicted rather than surrendering him | Court held the State may lawfully hold an indicted fugitive under R.C. 2963.17 and dismissed the habeas petition |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Hall v. Mohr, 140 Ohio St.3d 297, 17 N.E.3d 581 (2014) (R.C. 2969.25 requirements are mandatory; noncompliance requires dismissal)
- Fuqua v. Williams, 100 Ohio St.3d 211, 797 N.E.2d 982 (2003) (habeas corpus is a civil action and R.C. 2969.21–2969.27 apply)