Appellate procedure - Application for reopening appeal from judgment and conviction based on claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel - Application denied when .
OPINIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO
… SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITING …
The full texts of the opinions of the Supreme Court of
Ohio are being transmitted electronically beginning May 27,
1992, pursuant to a pilot project implemented by Chief Justice
Thomas J. Moyer.
Please call any errors to the attention of the Reporter's
Office of the Supreme Court of Ohio. Attention: Walter S.
Kobalka, Reporter, or Deborah J. Barrett, Administrative
Assistant. Tel.: (614) 466-4961; in Ohio 1-800-826-9010.
Your comments on this pilot project are also welcome.
NOTE: Corrections may be made by the Supreme Court to the
full texts of the opinions after they have been released
electronically to the public. The reader is therefore advised
to check the bound volumes of Ohio St.3d published by West
Publishing Company for the final versions of these opinions.
The advance sheets to Ohio St.3d will also contain the volume
and page numbers where the opinions will be found in the bound
volumes of the Ohio Official Reports.
The State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Hamblin, Appellant.
[Cite as State v. Hamblin (1994), Ohio St. 3d .]
Appellate procedure -- Application for reopening appeal from
judgment and conviction based on claim of ineffective
assistance of appellate counsel -- Application denied when
no colorable claim of ineffective assistance of appellate
counsel stated.
(No. 94-1818--Submitted November 29, 1994 -- Decided
December 23, 1994.)
Appeal from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County, No.
49975.
Appellant, David Hamblin, was convicted of aggravated
murder with death penalty specifications, aggravated robbery,
attempted murder, and having a weapon under disability. He was
sentenced to death on the aggravated murder conviction and to
periods of incarceration on the other convictions. The court
of appeals affirmed the convictions and sentences. We
affirmed. State v. Hamblin (1988),
, alleging
ineffective assistance of appellate counsel for failure to
raise twenty-three propositions of law on direct appeal. The
court of appeals examined the claims and denied the motion,
holding that some failed to state a colorable claim of
ineffective assistance of appellate counsel and others had been
raised and were therefore res judicata. Appellant appeals from
the denial of this motion, again raising the twenty-three
issues and also arguing that it is inappropriate to apply the
doctrine of res judicata in a Murnahan case.
Stephanie Tubbs Jones, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting
Attorney, and Diane Smilanick, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney,
for appellee.
David H. Bodiker, Ohio Public Defender, and Kathleen A.
McGarry,
Assistant State Public Defender, for appellant.
Per Curiam. The judgment of the court of appeals is
affirmed for the reasons stated in its opinion.
Judgment affirmed.
Moyer, C.J., A.W. Sweeney, Douglas, Wright, Resnick, F.E.
Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur.
