Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 2725.04 (2026)

Application for writ

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Application for the writ of habeas corpus shall be by petition, signed and verified either by the party for whose relief it is intended, or by some person for him, and shall specify:

(A) That the person in whose behalf the application is made is imprisoned, or restrained of his liberty;

(B) The officer, or name of the person by whom the prisoner is so confined or restrained; or, if both are unknown or uncertain, such officer or person may be described by an assumed appellation and the person who is served with the writ is deemed the person intended;

(C) The place where the prisoner is so imprisoned or restrained, if known;

(D) A copy of the commitment or cause of detention of such person shall be exhibited, if it can be procured without impairing the efficiency of the remedy; or, if the imprisonment or detention is without legal authority, such fact must appear.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 370 cases (84 in the last 5 years), 1955–2026 · leading case: State ex rel. Cannon v. Mohr (Slip Opinion), 2018 Ohio 4184 (Ohio 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State ex rel. Cannon v. Mohr (Slip Opinion), 2018 Ohio 4184 (Ohio 2018). · cites it 5× “Most significantly, the court faulted Cannon for his failure to attach all his commitment papers, in violation of R.C. 2725.04(D). In addition, the court held that the record did not support Cannon's claim for immediate release: The petition and attachments clearly reflect that…”
Watkins v. Collins, 111 Ohio St. 3d 425 (Ohio 2006). · cites it 5× “{¶ 33} R.C. 2725.04 also requires that the petition be verified: {¶ 34} “Application for the writ of habeas corpus shall be by petition, signed and verified either by the party for whose relief it is intended, or by some person for him * * {¶ 35} For purposes of R.”
Chari v. Vore, 744 N.E.2d 763 (Ohio 2001). · cites it 4× “On April 12, despite Chari’s failure to comply with the verification requirements of R.C. 2725.04 and his conclusory allegations, the court of appeals allowed the writ and ordered appellee, the Montgomery County Sheriff, to make a return on April 14.”
State ex rel. Foster v. Foley, 2022 Ohio 3168 (Ohio 2022). · cites it 4× “25(C), and petition fails to comply with R.C. 2725.04’s requirement that a habeas petition be verified—Court of appeals’ dismissal of petition affirmed.”
State ex rel. Norris v. Wainwright (Slip Opinion), 2019 Ohio 4138 (Ohio 2019). · cites it 4× “R. 12(B)(6). The court of appeals granted the motion to dismiss over Norris’s objections in January 2019, holding that Norris had failed to attach all of his commitment papers to his petition as required by R.”
Robinson v. McConahay, 2023 Ohio 498 (Ohio 2023). · cites it 8× “25(A)—Petitioner’s complaint was not verified as required by R.C. 2725.04—No rule authorizes an appellant to file a motion for summary judgment in a direct appeal to this court—Court of appeals’ judgment dismissing complaint affirmed—Motion for summary judgment denied.”
Harris v. Anderson, 109 Ohio St. 3d 101 (Ohio 2006). · cites it 3× “On March 4, 2005, the court of appeals dismissed the petition because of Harris’s failure to comply with the commitment-paper requirement of R.C. 2725.04(D). {¶ 3} On March 15, 2005, Harris filed a motion for relief from the March 4, 2005 judgment pursuant to Civ.”
Chari v. Vore, 2001 Ohio 49 (Ohio 2001). · cites it 4× “{¶ 4} On April 12, despite Chari’s failure to comply with the verification requirements of R.C. 2725.04 and his conclusory allegations, the court of appeals allowed the writ and ordered appellee, the Montgomery County Sheriff, to make a return on April 14.”
Hawkins v. S. Ohio Corr. Facility, 809 N.E.2d 1145 (Ohio 2004). · cites it 4× “Hawkins subsequently filed an unnotarized statement purporting to be his R.”
Robinson v. Miller (Slip Opinion), 2016 Ohio 7828 (Ohio 2016). · cites it 6× “{¶ 4} Robinson filed this action in habeas corpus in the Seventh District, claiming that the board did not have authority to extend his incarceration, because he had been given a final release from his 1995 conviction.”
Jones v. Wainwright (Slip Opinion), 2020 Ohio 4870 (Ohio 2020). · cites it 4× “First, he says that the common pleas court was not a court of competent jurisdiction, because he did not attach to his first petition documents that were required under R.”
Goudlock v. Voorhies, 894 N.E.2d 692 (Ohio 2008). · cites it 3× “R.C. 2725.04(D); Tisdale v. Eberlin, 114 Ohio St.”
Show all 370 citing cases →
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2725.04(A) — 3 cases
Pryor v. Lazaroff, 723 N.E.2d 178 (Ohio Ct. App. 1999).
State ex rel. Bruggeman v. Court of Common Pleas, 719 N.E.2d 543 (Ohio 1999).
State ex rel. Bruggeman v. Auglaize Cty. Court of Common Pleas, 1999 Ohio 52 (Ohio 1999).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2725.04(B) — 29 cases
State ex rel. Sherrills v. State, 742 N.E.2d 651 (Ohio 2001).
Daniel v. State, 786 N.E.2d 891 (Ohio 2003).
State ex rel. Rohrig v. Columbus, 2023 Ohio 1983 (Ohio Ct. App. 2023).
State ex rel. Wesley v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas (Slip Opinion), 2021 Ohio 3489 (Ohio 2021).
State v. Hertel, 2018 Ohio 5002 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2725.04(C) — 1 case
In re Frederick, 2017 Ohio 8122 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2725.04(D) — 246 cases
State ex rel. Cannon v. Mohr (Slip Opinion), 2018 Ohio 4184 (Ohio 2018). “Most significantly, the court faulted Cannon for his failure to attach all his commitment papers, in violation of R.C. 2725.04(D). In addition, the court held that the record did not support Cannon's claim for immediate release: The petition and attachments clearly reflect that…”
State ex rel. Norris v. Wainwright (Slip Opinion), 2019 Ohio 4138 (Ohio 2019). “R. 12(B)(6). The court of appeals granted the motion to dismiss over Norris’s objections in January 2019, holding that Norris had failed to attach all of his commitment papers to his petition as required by R.”
Harris v. Anderson, 109 Ohio St. 3d 101 (Ohio 2006). “On March 4, 2005, the court of appeals dismissed the petition because of Harris’s failure to comply with the commitment-paper requirement of R.C. 2725.04(D). {¶ 3} On March 15, 2005, Harris filed a motion for relief from the March 4, 2005 judgment pursuant to Civ.”
Robinson v. Miller (Slip Opinion), 2016 Ohio 7828 (Ohio 2016). “{¶ 4} Robinson filed this action in habeas corpus in the Seventh District, claiming that the board did not have authority to extend his incarceration, because he had been given a final release from his 1995 conviction.”
Watkins v. Collins, 111 Ohio St. 3d 425 (Ohio 2006). “{¶ 33} R.C. 2725.04 also requires that the petition be verified: {¶ 34} “Application for the writ of habeas corpus shall be by petition, signed and verified either by the party for whose relief it is intended, or by some person for him * * {¶ 35} For purposes of R.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.