ROBINSON, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF OHIO, APPELLEE.
No. 2021-0421
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO
November 3, 2021
Slip Opinion No. 2021-Ohio-3865
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Lorain County, No. 20CA011709, 2021-Ohio-634.
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as Robinson v. State, Slip Opinion No. 2021-Ohio-3865.]
NOTICE
This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requested to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typographical or other formal errors in the opinion, in order that corrections may be made before the opinion is published.
SLIP OPINION NO. 2021-OHIO-3865
ROBINSON, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF OHIO, APPELLEE.
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as Robinson v. State, Slip Opinion No. 2021-Ohio-3865.]
Habeas corpus—
(No. 2021-0421—Submitted September 7, 2021—Decided November 3, 2021.)
Per Curiam.
{¶ 1} Appellant, Martin Robinson, appeals the Ninth District Court of Appeals’ judgment dismissing his petition for a writ
I. Factual and Procedural Background
{¶ 2} Robinson is serving a 55-year prison sentence. On December 18, 2020, he filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the Ninth District. Robinson attached to his petition an affidavit of indigency, stating:
I, Martin Robinson, do hereby state that I am without the necessary funds to pay costs of this action for the following reasons:
I am illegally incarcerated in Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, and earn no money.
I request that any filing fees, court costs, deposits, if applicable, be waived, for all filings in these courts.
{¶ 3} The Lorain County Prosecuting Attorney, whom Robinson named as the respondent below, filed a motion to dismiss Robinson‘s petition under Civ.R. 12(B)(6), arguing that it was procedurally deficient on numerous grounds and that it failed state a claim that is cognizable in habeas corpus. Robinson did not file a response to the motion to dismiss.
{¶ 4} Without expressly ruling on the state‘s motion, the court of appeals dismissed Robinson‘s petition. The court of appeals found Robinson‘s affidavit of indigency deficient under
II. Analysis
A. Robinson‘s Motions
{¶ 5} With his reply brief in this appeal, Robinson included a motion for ” ‘Brady’ discovery, evidence, and complete record.” (Emphasis sic.) Although Robinson presumably seeks through that motion evidence that is favorable to him regarding his underlying convictions, see Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963), he does not explain what evidence he is seeking or offer any argument supporting his request. To the extent that Robinson is seeking additional evidence in support of his habeas corpus claim, the request is improper. “A reviewing court generally may not add matter to the record before it and then decide the appeal on the basis of the new matter.” State ex rel. Harris v. Turner, 160 Ohio St.3d 506, 2020-Ohio-2901, 159 N.E.3d 1121, ¶ 16. Accordingly, we deny Robinson‘s motion.
{¶ 6} We also deny Robinson‘s motion for oral argument. A case may be set for oral argument under S.Ct.Prac.R. 17.02(A) if it “involves a matter of great public importance, complex issues of law or fact, a substantial constitutional issue, or a conflict among courts of appeals.” State ex rel. Davis v. Pub. Emps. Retirement Bd., 111 Ohio St.3d 118, 2006-Ohio-5339, 855 N.E.2d 444, ¶ 15. This case involves none of those criteria.
B. Dismissal of the Habeas Petition
{¶ 7} We review de novo a court of appeals’ dismissal of a habeas corpus action for failure to comply with the affidavit
{¶ 8} An inmate seeking a waiver of the court‘s filing fees when commencing a civil action against a governmental entity or employee in a court of common pleas, court of appeals, county court, or municipal court must file with his complaint an affidavit stating that he is seeking a waiver of the prepayment of the court‘s full filing fees and an affidavit of indigency.
{¶ 9} Robinson‘s affidavit of indigency did not satisfy the mandatory requirements. It was not notarized and is therefore defective. See Griffin v. McFaul, 116 Ohio St.3d 30, 2007-Ohio-5506, 876 N.E.2d 527, ¶ 2, 4. Further, Robinson‘s affidavit failed to include the balance of his inmate account or a statement of any cash or things of value that he owns. See
{¶ 10} In this appeal, Robinson does not argue that he satisfied
{¶ 11} Accordingly, the court of appeals correctly dismissed Robinson‘s habeas petition.
Judgment affirmed.
O‘CONNOR, C.J., and KENNEDY, FISCHER, DEWINE, DONNELLY, STEWART, and BRUNNER, JJ., concur.
Martin Robinson, pro se.
J.D. Tomlinson, Lorain County Prosecuting Attorney, and Katherine L. Keefer, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.