State ex rel. Sherrills v. State
| Decision Date | 07 March 2001 |
| Docket Number | No. 00-1658.,00-1658. |
| Citation | 91 Ohio St.3d 133,742 NE 2d 651 |
| Parties | THE STATE EX REL. SHERRILLS, APPELLANT, v. THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLEE. |
| Court | Ohio Supreme Court |
Daries Sherrills, pro se.
William D. Mason, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and Diane Smilanick, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.
In July 2000, appellant, inmate Daries Sherrills, filed a complaint in the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County for a writ of mandamus to compel appellee, state of Ohio, to order that the journal in a case in that court reflect the truth and to file his brief in which he raised a claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. Sherrills alternatively sought a writ of habeas corpus to compel his immediate release from prison. The court of appeals sua sponte dismissed the cause. State ex rel. Sherrills v. State (Aug. 3, 2000), Cuyahoga App. No. 78261, unreported, 2000 WL 1060605.
In this cause now before the court upon Sherrills's appeal as of right, we find that the court of appeals correctly dismissed Sherrills's claims for extraordinary relief.
As the court of appeals held, Sherrills's complaint is defective because he failed to name the proper respondents and did not include their addresses. Civ.R. 10(A); R.C. 2725.04(B); State ex rel. Keener v. Amberley (1997), 80 Ohio St.3d 292, 293, 685 N.E.2d 1247, 1248; State ex rel. Jackson v. Lucas Cty. (Mar. 5, 1996), Lucas App. No. L-96-049, unreported, 1996 WL 171550; State ex rel. Lacavera v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas (Mar. 2, 2000), Cuyahoga App. No. 77359, unreported, 2000 WL 235748 ().
Moreover, to the extent that Sherrills requests a writ of habeas corpus, he failed to attach his commitment papers to his complaint. R.C. 2725.04(D); Sidle v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth. (2000), 89 Ohio St.3d 520, 733 N.E.2d 1115. Based on the foregoing, we affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.1Judgment affirmed.MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur.
1. We also deny Sherrills's motions to supplement and amend the record.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Carman v. Pinkney
...only includes the name of eachparty. A failure to comply with Civ.R. 10 is grounds for dismissal. State ex rel. Sherrills v. State, 91 Ohio St.3d 133, 133, 742 N.E.2d 651 (2001). {¶6} Second, R.C. 2725.04(D) requires a habeas corpus petitioner to include a copy of the commitment papers or t......
-
Carman v. Croucher
...Carman has failed to comply with R.C. 2725.04(B), necessitating denial of his claim. Id., citing State ex rel. Sherrills v. State, 91 Ohio St.3d 133, 742 N.E.2d 651 (2001) (Whitman holds that the failure to name the county sheriff as respondent is grounds for dismissal.).2. Civ.R. 10 Captio......
-
Relator v. Day
... ... sufficient grounds for denying the writ. State ex rel ... Sherrills v. State, 91 Ohio St.3d 133, 742 N.E.2d 651 ... ...
-
Wesley v. Cuyahoga Cnty. Court of Common Pleas, 109930
...failure to name the appropriate official as a respondent in an action for habeas corpus requires dismissal. State ex rel. Sherrills v. State, 91 Ohio St.3d 133, 742 N.E.2d 651 (2001); Carman at id. {¶ 22} Based on these grounds, relator's motion for reconsideration is denied. This court's s......