COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT
                       COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
                       NOS. 76129 & 76130
STATE OF OHIO EX REL.         :
JOHN MANCINI,                 :    PETITION FOR WRIT OF
                              :    HABEAS CORPUS
          Petitioner          :
                              :
     -vs-                     :
                              :    JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION
JUDGE MARY DUNNING,           :
                              :
          Respondent          :
DATE OF JOURNALIZATION:       MARCH 16, 1999
JUDGMENT:                     DISMISSED.
APPEARANCES:
For Petitioner:               John Mancini, Pro Se
                              No. 97614
                              P.O. Box 5600
                              Cleveland, Ohio 44101
For Respondent:               Timothy G. Dobeck, Esq.
                              Prosecutor
                              City of Parma
                              5750 West 54th Street
                              Parma, Ohio 44129
                               -2-
MICHAEL J. CORRIGAN, J.:
     John Mancini, petitioner, has filed a petition for a writ of
habeas corpus against respondent, Judge Mary Dunning of the Parma
Municipal Court.   Petitioner claims  (1) respondent was  without
jurisdiction to sentence him because he never voluntarily  waived
his  right  to counsel,  and  (2)  respondent  imposed  excessive
postconviction bail.   For the following  reasons we dismiss  the
petition sua sponte.
     A review of the petition indicates that petitioner has failed
to comply with the requirements of R.C. 2725.04(D) which requires
that a copy of the commitment or cause of detention be submitted.
In postconviction cases, the attachments must also relate to  the
claim(s) made in the petition.   Brown v. Rogers (1995), 72  Ohio
St.3d 339, 650 N.E.2d 422.  Petitioner has attached no orders  of
the trial court, not even the postconviction order granting bail.
Absent compliance with R.C. 2725.04(D), a petition for a writ  of
habeas corpus will be dismissed.  Id.; Bloss v. Rogers (1992), 65
Ohio St.3d 145, 602 N.E.2d 602.
     In addition, petitioner did not name the person  maintaining
custody over  him and  has failed to  provide this  court with  a
detailed  affidavit in  support of  his petition  as required  by
Loc.App.R. 45(B)(1)(a).  Again, dismissal is warranted.  State ex
rel. Rolling v. State of Ohio (Dec. 21, 1998), Cuyahoga App.  No.
75696, unreported.
     Finally, a writ of habeas  corpus will not be allowed if  it
appears that a petitioner is being held pursuant to the judgment of
                               -3-
a court possessing jurisdiction to render such a judgment.   R.C.
2725.05. Petitioner's claim that he did not voluntarily waive his
right to counsel does not present a jurisdictional challenge to the
competency of the court, but rather is an issue which may be raised
on appeal.  See State v.  Roseman (1981), 3 Ohio App.3d 272,  444
N.E.2d 1036; State v. Kleve (1981), 2 Ohio App.3d 407, 442 N.E.2d
483; State v. Haag (1976), 49 Ohio App.2d 268, 360 N.E.2d 756.  In
fact, petitioner has  filed an appeal to  this court on March  5,
1999, which is entitled City of Brooklyn v. Mancini, Cuyahoga App.
No. 76126.  Habeas corpus cannot  be used as a substitute for  an
appeal.  In re Petition of  Brown (1990), 49 Ohio St.3d 222,  551
N.E.2d 954; Pollock v. Morris (1988), 35 Ohio St.3d 117, 518 N.E.2d
1205.
     Case dismissed.  Costs to petitioner.
                                   ______________________________
                                        MICHAEL J. CORRIGAN
                                              JUDGE
TIMOTHY E. McMONAGLE, P.J., and
BLACKMON,J., CONCUR.
.