Panezich v. Green , 2016 Ohio 7948 ( 2016 )


Menu:
  • [Cite as Panezich v. Green, 2016-Ohio-7948.]
    STATE OF OHIO, MAHONING COUNTY
    IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
    SEVENTH DISTRICT
    CLIFTON J. PANEZICH                             )
    )
    PETITIONER                              )
    )            CASE NO. 16 MA 0163
    VS.                                             )
    )                  OPINION
    SHERIFF JERRY GREEN                             )                   AND
    )              JUDGMENT ENTRY
    RESPONDENT                              )
    CHARACTER OF PROCEEDINGS:                       Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
    JUDGMENT:                                       Dismissed.
    APPEARANCES:
    For Petitioner                                  Attorney Percy Squire
    341 S. Third Street, Suite 10
    Columbus, Ohio 43215
    For Respondent                                  Attorney Paul Gains
    Mahoning County Prosecutor
    Attorney Martin P. Desmond
    Assistant Prosecutor
    21 W. Boardman Street, 6th Floor
    Youngstown, Ohio 44503
    JUDGES:
    Hon. Mary DeGenaro
    Hon. Gene Donofrio
    Hon. Carol Ann Robb
    Dated: November 23, 2016
    [Cite as Panezich v. Green, 2016-Ohio-7948.]
    PER CURIAM.
    {¶1}    Petitioner Clifton J. Panezich has filed a petition writ of habeas corpus
    seeking to have his bail reversed and set aside arguing that it constitutes excessive
    bail. Respondent State of Ohio has filed a motion to dismiss.
    {¶2}    On October 6, 2016, the Mahoning County Grand Jury issued a 22-
    count indictment naming Petitioner and two codefendants. The indictment alleged
    that Petitioner and the codefendants had engaged in a criminal enterprise that sold
    counterfeit sports and entertainment memorabilia over the internet. More specifically,
    Petitioner was charged as follows: Count One—Aggravated Theft, in violation of R.C.
    2913.02(A)(3)(B)(1)(2), a first-degree felony; Count Two—Telecommunications
    Fraud, in violation of R.C. 2913.05(A)(C), a first-degree felony; Count Three—
    Forgery, in violation of R.C. 2913.31(A)(1)(C)(1)(a)(b), a third-degree felony; Count
    Four—Forgery, in violation of R.C. 2913.31(A)(2)(C)(1)(a)(b), a third-degree felony;
    Count Five—Forgery, in violation of R.C. 2913.31(A)(3)(C)(1)(a)(b), a third-degree
    felony; Count Six—Identity Fraud, in violation of R.C. 2913.49(B)(1)(1)(2), a second-
    degree      felony;    Count      Seven—Money    Laundering,    in   violation   of   R.C.
    1315.55(A)(1)(B), a third-degree felony; and Count Twenty Two—Engaging in a
    Pattern of Corrupt Activity, in violation of R.C. 2923.32(A)(1)(B), a first-degree felony.
    {¶3}    At Petitioner’s request, the trial court conducted a bond hearing.
    Evidence was presented that although Petitioner was born and raised in the
    Mahoning County area, he was residing in Las Vegas, Nevada at the time of his
    indictment.     Following the bond hearing, the trial court set Petitioner’s bond at
    $500,000. After a second bond hearing, the trial court again set Petitioner’s bond at
    $500,000.
    {¶4}    Following the filing of his petition for writ of habeas corpus before this
    Court, Petitioner filed an amended petition requesting expedited treatment and a
    shortened response time on November 8, 2016. Meanwhile, Relator had filed a
    motion to dismiss.
    {¶5}    Upon review, it is apparent that the petition must be dismissed. When
    an inmate files a civil action filed against a governmental entity or employee, R.C.
    -2-
    2969.25(A) requires the petitioner to file an affidavit with the petition describing all
    civil actions and appeals they have filed in state or federal court within the past five
    years. Petitioner has not included the required affidavit. The Ohio Supreme Court
    has held that the “requirements of R.C. 2969.25 are mandatory and failure to comply
    with them requires dismissal of an inmate’s complaint.” State ex rel. Hall v. Mohr, 
    140 Ohio St. 3d 297
    , 2014-Ohio-3735, 
    17 N.E.3d 581
    , ¶ 4. See also Fuqua v. Williams,
    
    100 Ohio St. 3d 211
    , 2003-Ohio-5533, 
    797 N.E.2d 982
    , ¶¶ 6-9 (“A habeas corpus
    action is a civil action and therefore the provisions of R.C. 2969.21 through 2969.27
    are applicable to such action.”). Even belated attempts to file this affidavit cannot
    correct noncompliance with the statute. 
    Id. at ¶
    9.
    {¶6}   Accordingly, the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is dismissed.
    {¶7}   Costs taxed against Petitioner. Final order. Clerk to serve notice as
    provided by the Civil Rules.
    DeGenaro, J., concurs.
    Donofrio, P.J., concurs.
    Robb, J., concurs.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 16 MA 0163

Citation Numbers: 2016 Ohio 7948

Judges: Per Curiam

Filed Date: 11/23/2016

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 12/7/2016