COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT
                       COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
                      NOS. 77320 and 77321
STATE OF OHIO, EX REL.        :    PETITION FOR WRIT OF
DANIEL MICKEY, ET AL.         :    HABEAS CORPUS
                              :
               Relators       :    MOTION NO. 12565
                              :
          vs.                 :    JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION
                              :
GERALD T. MCFAUL, SHERIFF,    :
     ET AL.                   :
                              :
               Respondents    :
                              :
DATE OF JOURNALIZATION   :    DECEMBER 23, 1999
JUDGMENT                 :    WRIT DISMISSED.
APPEARANCES:
For Relators             :    AUDREY-L MICKEY, Pro Se
                              4459 Edgerton Road
                              North Royalton, Ohio 44133
For Respondents          :    WILLIAM D. MASON,
                                Cuyahoga County Prosecutor
                              Justice Center, Courts Tower
                              1200 Ontario Street
                              Cleveland, Ohio 44113
                              CHARLES RIEHL, Law Director
                              Village of Cuyahoga Heights
                              4863 East 71st Street
                              Cleveland, Ohio 44125
                              DAVID E. MACK, Law Director
                              City of Garfield Heights
                              5407 Turney Road
                              Garfield Heights, Ohio 44125
JAMES M. PORTER, A.J.:
     Sua sponte, Case Nos. 77320 and 77321 are consolidated.
     The petitions in these cases were filed by Audrey-L Mickey as
                               -2-
  next  best  friend    of  each  petitioner.    Audrey-L  Mickey
acknowledges that she is not an attorney.
     In State ex rel. Jenkins v. McFaul (Apr. 23, 1998), Cuyahoga
App. No.  74047, unreported, this  court dismissed  an action  in
habeas corpus.  The Jenkins court noted that the person who signed
the petition did not demonstrate that he was an attorney  despite
the fact that there were several other petitioners.
     The failure to  make this demonstration is a basis  for
     dismissing an original action.  See, e.g.,  State ex rel.
     Anderson v. Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas (Apr.
     15, 1993), Cuyahoga App. No. 65165, unreported (dismissal
     because the complaint was signed by a person--other than
     relator--who has not demonstrated that he is an attorney
     admitted to the practice of law).  See also R.C. 4705.01.
Jenkins, supra, at 2. Audrey-L Mickey's acknowledgment that she is
not an  attorney provides  a sufficient basis  for this court  to
dismiss this action sua sponte.
     Additional grounds for dismissal which were present in Jenkins
are also present in these actions.
          We also note that the petition is not verified  as
     required by R.C. 2725.04.   State ex rel. Ranzy v. Coyle
     (1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 109, 110, __ N.E.2d __ (affirming
     the denial by the court of appeals of an action in habeas
     corpus). Additionally, petitioner(s) did not attach all
     of the pertinent commitment papers as required by  R.C.
     2725.04(D).  Id.  Furthermore, petitioner(s) failed  to
     comply  with  Loc.  App.  R.  8(B)(1)  [now  Loc.App.R.
     45(B)(1)] which  requires that  complaints in  original
     actions be supported by an affidavit from the plaintiff
     or  relator  specifying  the  details  of  the  claim.
     Likewise, the absence of an affidavit provides a  basis
     for dismissal. See, e.g., State ex rel. Delgado v. Court
     of Common Pleas (Feb. 5, 1998), Cuyahoga App. No. 73341,
     unreported, at 5.
Jenkins,  supra,  at 2-3.    Each  of these  grounds  provides  a
sufficient basis for this court to dismiss this action sua sponte.
                               -3-
See also Degan v. McFaul (Nov. 23, 1999), Cuyahoga App. No. 77238,
unreported, at 3-4.
     Additionally, petitioners have  not provided the filing  fee
required  as security  for costs  or an  affidavit of  indigency.
Loc.App.R. 45(A).   Failure to  provide security  for costs  also
provides a ground for dismissal.   State ex rel. Novak v.  Fuerst
(Oct. 9, 1996), Cuyahoga App. No. 71299, unreported.
     We also note that one of the respondents is a judge.  A judge
is not an appropriate  respondent in an action in habeas  corpus.
Woodman  v.  Jones  (Jan. 2,  1998),  Cuyahoga  App.  No.  73501,
unreported.
     Each petitioner also  avers that he filed a UCC-1  statement
with  the Secretary of  State of Ohio  naming himself as  debtor.
Petitioners have not cited any authority for the proposition that
the filing of a UCC-1 statement is a ground for relief in  habeas
corpus. As a consequence, we hold that the petitions fail to state
a claim in habeas corpus.
     Accordingly, Case  Nos. 77320  and 77321  are dismissed  sua
sponte.  Petitioners to pay costs.
     Writs dismissed.
ANN DYKE, J., CONCURS.
.