Peterson v. Black

2024 Ohio 1963

• Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
• Decided: May 22, 2024
• Docket: 31118
• Status: Published

Opinion

[Cite as Peterson v. Black, 2024-Ohio-1963.]

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

STATE EX REL. SAMSON W. PETERSON C.A. No. 31118 Petitioner

v. ORIGINAL ACTION IN JENNIFER GILLECE-BLACK HABEAS CORPUS

Respondent

Dated: May 22, 2024

PER CURIAM.

{¶1} Petitioner Samson W. Peterson has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus asking

this Court to order Respondent Jennifer Gillece-Black, Warden of Lorain Correctional Institution,

to release him from prison. Because Mr. Peterson filed his petition in the wrong county, this case

must be dismissed.

{¶2} R.C. 2725.02 authorizes courts of appeals to grant writs of habeas corpus. That

grant of jurisdiction, however, is limited by R.C. 2725.03, which states that only courts of the

county “in which the institution is located [have] jurisdiction to issue or determine a writ of habeas

corpus * * *.” According to the petition, Mr. Peterson is incarcerated in the Lorain Correctional

Institution, a state correctional institution located in Lorain County. Mr. Peterson filed his petition

in Summit County, the county of his conviction, according to the petition, rather than Lorain

County, the county of his incarceration. C.A. No. 31118 Page 2 of 2

{¶3} The Ohio Supreme Court considered this issue in Brown v. Hall, 123 Ohio St.3d

381, 2009-Ohio-5592. Mr. Brown was incarcerated in Richland County, but filed his petition in

Stark County; both Richland and Stark Counties are part of the Fifth District Court of Appeals.

The Fifth District considered Mr. Brown’s petition on the merits. The Supreme Court reversed

and ordered the case dismiss. The Court held that even though the “petition reached the same

district court of appeals it would have had it been filed in the correct county, the court of appeals

still lacked jurisdiction to determine the merits of [the] petition.” Brown at ¶ 1.

{¶4} Like Mr. Brown, in this case, Mr. Peterson’s petition also reached the same district

it would have had he filed it in Lorain County. Nevertheless, Mr. Peterson’s improper filing of

the petition in Summit County has deprived this Court of jurisdiction to consider it. Id. See also

Chatman v. Santiago, 9th Dist. Summit No. 25197 (May 14, 2010).

{¶5} Because Mr. Peterson did not file his petition in the county in which he is

incarcerated, this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider it. Accordingly, this case is dismissed.

{¶6} Costs are taxed to Mr. Peterson. 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).

BETTY SUTTON FOR THE COURT

HENSAL, J. FLAGG LANZINGER, J. CONCUR.

APPEARANCES:

SAMSON W. PETERSON, Pro se, Petitioner.