State v. Ward

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 

.]




              THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLEE, v. WARD, APPELLANT.
                        [Cite as State v. Ward, 

.]
Appellate procedure—Application for reopening appeal from judgment and
        conviction based on claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel—
        Application denied when applicant fails to show good cause for failure to
        file the motion within ninety days after journalization of the court of
        appeals’ decision affirming the conviction, as required by App.R.
        26(B)(2)(b).
         (No. 96-238—Submitted April 15, 1996—Decided June 5, 1996.)
   APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Hamilton County, Nos. C-910878 and
                                        C-910881.
                                  __________________
        {¶ 1} According to the state, appellant, Fredrick E. Ward, was convicted of
felonious sexual penetration and gross sexual imposition and sentenced to prison in
October 1991. In June 1992, the court of appeals affirmed his convictions and
sentence. State v. Ward (June 19, 1992), Hamilton App. Nos. C-910878 and C-
910881, unreported.
        {¶ 2} Subsequently, Ward filed with the court of appeals an application to
reopen his appeal under App.R. 26(B), which governs claims alleging ineffective
assistance of appellate counsel. The court of appeals found that Ward had “failed
to show good cause for filing his application more than ninety days after …
judgment was journalized, as required by App.R. 26(B)(2)(b).” Hence, the court
of appeals denied Ward’s application. Ward appeals that denial to this court.
                                  __________________
        Joseph T. Deters, Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney, and Philip R.
Cummings, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.
                            SUPREME COURT OF OHIO




        Fredrick E. Ward, pro se.
                              __________________
        Per Curiam.
        {¶ 3} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals for the reasons stated
in that court’s entry.
                                                               Judgment affirmed.
        MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and
STRATTON, JJ., concur.
                              __________________




                                         2