Thomas v. Tibbals

2011 Ohio 6087
CourtOhio Court of Appeals
DecidedNovember 21, 2011
Docket97519
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 2011 Ohio 6087 (Thomas v. Tibbals) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Thomas v. Tibbals, 2011 Ohio 6087 (Ohio Ct. App. 2011).

Opinion

[Cite as Thomas v. Tibbals, 2011-Ohio-6087.]

Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA

JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 97519

GARY THOMAS RELATOR

vs.

WARDEN TERRY TIBBALS RESPONDENT

JUDGMENT: PETITION DISMISSED

Writ of Habeas Corpus Order No. 449455

RELEASE DATE: November 21, 2011 2

FOR RELATOR

Gary Thomas, pro se Inmate #A601-988 Mansfield Correctional Institution 1150 N. Main Street Mansfield, Ohio 44901

ATTORNEY FOR RESPONDENT WARDEN TERRY TIBBALS

Mike DeWine Ohio Attorney General

By: Gregory T. Hartke Assistant Attorney General Criminal Justice Section – Habeas Unit State Office Building, 11th Floor 615 West Superior Avenue Cleveland, Ohio 44113-1899

COLLEEN CONWAY COONEY, J.:

{¶ 1} Gary Thomas has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus seeking

immediate release from prison. Sua sponte, we dismiss the petition for lack of territorial

jurisdiction because Thomas is incarcerated at the Mansfield Correctional Institution

located in Mansfield, Ohio. 3

{¶ 2} One of the basic requirements for the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus is

that, regardless of where the petitioner was convicted, the petition can only be brought

and proceed in the county where he is actually incarcerated. Bridges v. McMackin

(1989), 44 Ohio St.3d 135, 541 N.E.2d 1035. This court does not possess the authority

to order the release of a person from prison unless the prison lies within our territorial

jurisdiction, which is Cuyahoga County. State ex rel. Durham v. Wilson, Cuyahoga

App. No. 85928, 2005-Ohio-757; State ex rel. Lewis v. Morgan (June 17, 1999),

Cuyahoga App. No. 76314; State ex rel. Mays v. McFaul (Mar. 18, 1999), Cuyahoga App.

No. 75833. Since Thomas is not incarcerated in Cuyahoga County, we lack jurisdiction

to address the petition for a writ of habeas corpus.

{¶ 3} Accordingly, we sua sponte dismiss the petition for a writ of habeas corpus.

Costs to Thomas. It is further ordered that the Clerk of the Eighth District Court of

Appeals serve notice upon all parties as required by Civ.R. 58(B).

Petition dismissed.

__________________________________________ COLLEEN CONWAY COONEY, JUDGE

MARY J. BOYLE, P.J., and KATHLEEN ANN KEOUGH, J., CONCUR

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State ex rel. Russo v. Tibbals
2012 Ohio 158 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2011 Ohio 6087, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thomas-v-tibbals-ohioctapp-2011.