Kittrell v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as Kittrell v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth., 2002-Ohio-5574.] COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA NO. 81744 BYRON KITTRELL : : : : : : Relator vs. PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS STATE OF OHIO : ADULT PAROLE AUTHORITY : Respondent : JUDGMENT : WRIT DISMISSED. DATE OF JOURNALIZATION : OCTOBER 17, 2002 APPEARANCES: For relator: BYRON L. KITTRELL, pro se 10309 Elk Avenue Cleveland, Ohio 44108 For respondent: BETTY D. MONTGOMERY Attorney General of Ohio State Office Tower 16th Floor 30 East Broad Street Columbus, Ohio 43215 SWEENEY, JAMES D. P.J.: {¶1} Petitioner is the defendant in State v. Kittrell, Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case No. CR-376183, 377059 and 416690. Petitioner avers that he is entitled to relief in habeas corpus because: he has been denied his right to a speedy trial; and respondent, Adult Parole Authority, does not have the authority to arrest or supervise him under post-release control. For the reasons stated below, we dismiss the petition sua sponte. {¶2} In Griffin v. McFaul, Cuyahoga App. No. 81658, 2002-Ohio-4929, Griffin contended that he [was] entitled to relief in habeas corpus because: he [had] been denied his right to a speedy trial; [and] *** the Adult Parole Authority [did] not have authority to arrest or supervise him under post- release control ***. Id. at ¶1. This court dismissed Griffin sua sponte for failure to state a claim and noted that appeal is the appropriate remedy for reviewing both a claimed violation of speedy trial rights and the issue of whether a defendant is properly subject to post-release control. In light of Griffin, therefore, we hold that Kittrell has failed to state a claim for relief in habeas corpus. {¶3} The petition is also deficient in several aspects. As was the case in Griffin, Kittrell has failed to: support his complaint with an affidavit specifying the details of the claim as required by Local Rule 45(B)(1)(a); include the addresses of the parties as required by Civ.R. 10(A); attach a copy of the commitment papers to the petition as required by R.C. 2725.04(D); and support his complaint with the affidavit required by R.C. 2969.25(A). Each of these defects is a sufficient ground for dismissal of this action. {¶4} Accordingly, we dismiss this action sua sponte. Kittrell 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). Writ dismissed. JAMES J. SWEENEY, J., and DIANE KARPINSKI, J., CONCUR. JAMES D. SWEENEY PRESIDING JUDGE
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
