[Cite as State ex rel. Davis v. Walker, 2011-Ohio-5282.]
Court of Appeals of Ohio
EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION
No. 97341
STATE OF OHIO EX REL.
KENNETH DAVIS, JR.
RELATOR
vs.
HONORABLE SANDRA WALKER, JUDGE
RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT:
DISMISSED
Writ of Procedendo
Order No. 448219
RELEASE DATE: October 12, 2011
-i-
2
FOR RELATOR:
Kenneth Davis, Jr., Pro Se
Inmate #A-564-782
Lake Erie Correctional Institution
P.O. Box 8000
Conneaut, Ohio 44030
ATTORNEY FOR RESPONDENT:
Ronald K. Riley
Director of Law
City of East Cleveland
14340 Euclid Avenue
East Cleveland, Ohio 44112
KENNETH A. ROCCO, J.:
{¶ 1} Relator, Kenneth Davis, Jr., avers that he is the defendant in E. Cleveland v.
Davis, E. Cleveland Municipal Court Case No. 08TRD04307. Davis requests that this
court compel respondent to rule on his motion to withdraw plea.
{¶ 2} In Hazel v. Knab, ___ Ohio St.3d ___ , 2011-Ohio-4608, ___ N.E.2d ___
, petitioner Hazel was incarcerated and filed an action in habeas corpus. “* * *
[A]lthough he filed an affidavit of indigency and sought waiver of prepayment of the
court’s filing fees, he failed to include in his affidavit of indigency a statement setting
3
forth the balance in his inmate account for each of the preceding six months, as certified
by the institutional cashier, in violation of R.C. 2969.25(C). “The requirements of R.C.
2969.25 are mandatory, and failure to comply with them subjects an inmate’s action to
dismissal.’ State ex rel. White v. Bechtel, 99 Ohio St.3d 11, 2003-Ohio-2262, 788 N.E.2d
634, ¶5. Hazel’s subsequent filing of the statement did not cure the defect. See R.C.
2969.25(C); see also Fuqua v. Williams, 100 Ohio St.3d 211, 2003-Ohio-5533, 797
N.E.2d 982, ¶9.” Id. ¶1. The supreme court affirmed the judgment of the court of
appeals dismissing Hazel’s petition in habeas corpus.
{¶ 3} Davis is currently incarcerated. He states that the “Certificate of the
Institutional Cashier” is attached to his affidavit seeking waiver of prepayment of the
court’s filing fees and affidavit of indigency pursuant to R.C. 2969.25(C). A thorough
review of the original affidavit and the copies filed with the court, however, reflects that
Davis has not filed the R.C. 2969.25(C) cashier’s statement. As noted in Hazel, this
defect requires dismissal of this action and cannot be cured by supplementing the
complaint with the cashier’s statement later.
{¶ 4} Accordingly, we dismiss this action sua sponte. Relator to pay costs. The
clerk is directed to serve upon the parties notice of this judgment and its date of entry
upon the journal. Civ.R. 58(B).
Complaint dismissed.
4
_______________________________
KENNETH A. ROCCO, JUDGE
PATRICIA ANN BLACKMON, P.J., and
MARY J. BOYLE, J., CONCUR