In re Perkins

Opinion

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

IN RE: BETHANY PERKINS C.A. No. 25CA012384 Relator

ORIGINAL ACTION IN

HABEAS CORPUS

Dated: June 29, 2026

PER CURIAM.

{¶1} Bethany Perkins has petitioned this Court for a writ of habeas corpus.

Because she has not complied with the requirements of R.C. 2725.04, her petition is dismissed.

{¶2} Under R.C. 2725.04, a petition for a writ of habeas corpus must specify “[t]he officer, or name of the person by whom the prisoner is so confined or restrained. . . .” R.C. 2725.04(B). “The proper respondent in a habeas action is the person who has legal custody of the individual[.]” State ex rel. Wesley v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas, 2021-Ohio-3489, ¶ 12. A habeas petition may be dismissed when it fails to name a proper respondent. Gomez v. Bennett, 2021-Ohio-2797, ¶ 7; State ex rel. Sherrills v. State, 91 Ohio St.3d 133 (2001). Ms. Perkins’ petition does not name any respondent, so it fails to comply with R.C. 2725.04(B). See also Civ.R. 10(A).

{¶3} The complaint is dismissed. Costs taxed to Ms. Perkins. 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. See Civ.R. 58(B).

SCOT STEVENSON

FOR THE COURT

HENSAL, J. SUTTON, J. CONCUR.

APPEARANCES: BETHANY PERKINS, Pro Se, Relator. ANTHONY CILLO, Prosecuting Attorney