Appellate procedure—Application for reopening appeal from judgment and conviction based on claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel—Application denied when there is no showing that appellate counsel violated any essential duties in representing applicant, or that applicant was prejudiced by counsel's representation on appeal.
.]
THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLEE, v. SABO, APPELLANT.
[Cite as State v. Sabo,
1996-Ohio-25
.]
Appellate procedure—Application for reopening appeal from judgment and
conviction based on claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel—
Application denied when there is no showing that appellate counsel
violated any essential duties in representing applicant, or that applicant
was prejudiced by counsel’s representation on appeal.
(No. 96-661—Submitted May 21, 1996—Decided July 17, 1996.)
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Athens County, No. 1273.
__________________
{¶ 1} In March 1985, appellant, Larry Sabo, was convicted of complicity in
aggravated murder and complicity in attempted aggravated murder. Appellant was
thereafter sentenced to consecutive terms of imprisonment. Upon appeal, the
convictions were affirmed. State v. Sabo (Sept. 5, 1986), Athens App. No. 1273,
unreported. Appellant’s appeal to this court was dismissed sua sponte. State v.
Sabo (Mar. 11, 1987), case No. 86-1605.
{¶ 2} According to the parties, on January 30, 1996, appellant filed an
application for reopening before the court of appeals pursuant to App.R. 26(B),
alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. The court of appeals denied
the application, finding that there was no showing that appellate counsel violated
any essential duties in representing appellant, or that appellant was prejudiced by
appellate counsel’s representation on appeal. This appeal followed.
__________________
William R. Biddlestone, Athens County Prosecuting Attorney, and Birgit
Pedersen, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.
Larry Sabo, pro se.
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO
__________________
Per Curiam.
{¶ 3} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals for the reasons set
forth in its decision and judgment entry.
Judgment affirmed.
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and
STRATTON, JJ., concur.
__________________
2
