Hasty v. Black

Opinion

STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF LORAIN )

RICHARD HASTY C.A. No. 26CA000084 Petitioner v.

JENNIFER BLACK, WARDEN ORIGINAL ACTION IN HABEAS CORPUS

Respondent

Dated: July 27, 2026

PER CURIAM.

{¶1} Richard Hasty has petitioned this Court for a writ of habeas corpus. Because Mr.

Hasty failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of R.C. 2725.04(D), this Court must dismiss this case.

{¶2} R.C. 2725.04(D) requires a copy of the commitment papers to be filed with a petition for habeas corpus. The Ohio Supreme Court has held that because “‘commitment papers are necessary for a complete understanding of the petition,’” the omission of commitment papers is a fatal defect. Brown v. Rogers, 72 Ohio St.3d 339, 341 (1995), quoting Bloss v. Rogers, 65 Ohio St.3d 145, 146 (1992). “When a petition is presented to a court that does not comply with R.C. 2725.04(D), there is no showing of how the commitment was procured and there is nothing before the court on which to make a determined judgment except, of course, the bare allegations of petitioner’s application.” Brown at 341, quoting Bloss at 146. Mr. Hasty did not comply with the mandatory requirements of R.C. 2725.04(D), so this case must be dismissed.

{¶3} This case is dismissed. Costs are taxed to Mr. Hasty.

{¶4} The clerk of courts is hereby directed to serve upon all parties not in default notice of this judgment and its date of entry upon the journal. Civ.R. 58.

JILL FLAGG LANZINGER

FOR THE COURT

SUTTON, J. STEVENSON, J. CONCUR.

APPEARANCES: RICHARD HASTY, Pro Se, Petitioner.

D. ANDREW WILSON, Ohio Attorney General, and ANDREW R. LINDHOME, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.