Forrest-Bey v. May

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

[Cite as Forrest-Bey v. May, 2020-Ohio-3482.] COURT OF APPEALS RICHLAND COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT CHRISTOPHER M. FORREST-BEY, SR. Petitioner JUDGES: Hon. William B. Hoffman, P.J. Hon. Patricia A. Delaney, J. Hon. Earle E. Wise, Jr., J. -vsCase No. 2020 CA 0044 HAROLD MAY Respondent O P I N IO N CHARACTER OF PROCEEDINGS: Writ of Habeas Corpus JUDGMENT: Dismissed DATE OF JUDGMENT ENTRY: June 24, 2020 APPEARANCES: For Petitioner For Respondent CHRISTOPHER M. FORREST-BEY, SR. A763516 Richland Correctional Institution 1001 Olivesburg Road P.O. Box 8107 Mansfield, Ohio 44901 GARY D. BISHOP Richland County Prosecuting Attorney 38 S. Park Street Mansfield, Ohio 44902 Richland County, Case No. 2020 CA 0044 2 Hoffman, P.J. {¶1} On May 18, 2020, Petitioner, Christopher M. Forrest-Bey, Sr., filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus against Harold May, Warden of the Richland Correctional Institution. Mr. Forrest-Bey sets forth several grounds in support of his petition and based upon these grounds, he claims he should be released from prison. The grounds asserted by Mr. Forrest-Bey include: (1) the trial court lacked jurisdiction because of an unsigned warrant; (2) the trial court lacked jurisdiction over arrest warrants issued without any probable cause determination; and (3) the trial court lacked jurisdiction over arrest warrants issued by a clerk who works for the police department. {¶2} Due to the following deficiencies, Mr. Forrest-Bey’s petition is not sufficient to maintain an action for habeas corpus and his petition is sua sponte dismissed. First, the petition is not verified as required by R.C. 2725.04. The failure to verify the petition requires dismissal. State v. Vore, 91 Ohio St.3d 323, 327, 744 N.E.2d 763 (2001); State ex rel. Crigger v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth., 82 Ohio St.3d 270, 272, 695 N.E.2d 254 (1998). Second, Mr. Forrest-Bey did not comply with R.C. 2725.04(D), which requires a copy of the commitment or cause of detention be attached to the petition for writ of habeas corpus. Without the commitment papers, the writ of habeas corpus is fatally defective. Brown v. Rogers, 72 Ohio St.3d 339, 341, 650 N.E.2d 422 (1995). {¶3} Third, Mr. Forrest-Bey filed an affidavit of indigency, but failed to include required documentation for his affidavit of indigency in violation of R.C. 2969.25(C)(1). Section (C)(1) requires a statement that sets forth the balance in the inmate’s account for each of the preceding six months, as certified by the institutional cashier. The statutory requirements contained in R.C. 2969.25(C) are mandatory and failure to comply subjects Richland County, Case No. 2020 CA 0044 3 Mr. Forrest-Bey’s petition to dismissal. Al’Shahid v. Cook, 144 Ohio St.3d 15, 2015-Ohio2079, 40 N.E.3d 1073, ¶ 9. {¶4} For the foregoing reasons, we sua sponte dismiss Mr. Forrest-Bey’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. 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. PETITION SUA SPONTE DISMISSED. COSTS TO PETITIONER. IT IS SO ORDERED. By: Hoffman, P.J. Delaney, J. and Wise, Earle, J. concur

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.