[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at
90 Ohio St.3d 454.]
THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLEE, v. JELLS, APPELLANT.
[Cite as State v. Jells, 2000-Ohio-93.]
Appellate procedure—Application for reopening appeal from judgment of
conviction based on claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel—
Court of appeals’ denial of application affirmed—Application denied
when applicant fails to establish a colorable claim of ineffective assistance
of counsel on the part of appellate counsel.
(No. 00-1053—Submitted October 10, 2000—Decided December 27, 2000.)
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County, No. 54733.
__________________
{¶ 1} Appellant, Reginald Jells, was convicted of aggravated murder with a
death specification, and two counts of kidnapping. He was sentenced to death.
Upon appeal, the court of appeals affirmed the convictions and sentence. State v.
Jells (May 1, 1989), Cuyahoga App. No. 54733, unreported. On direct appeal as
of right, we also affirmed his convictions and sentence on August 8, 1990. State v.
Jells (1990), 53 Ohio St.3d 22,
559 N.E.2d 464.
{¶ 2} On March 11, 1999, appellant filed an application for reopening with
the court of appeals pursuant to App.R. 26(B) and State v. Murnahan (1992), 63
Ohio St.3d 60,
584 N.E.2d 1204, alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel
on his direct appeal.
{¶ 3} The court of appeals stated that the application was untimely and that
Jells had failed to show good cause for the late application. The court further opined
that res judicata also required that the application be denied. In addition, the court
of appeals reasoned that counsel failed to file a sufficient affidavit, pursuant to
App.R. 26(B)(2)(d), setting forth the basis for the claim that appellate counsel had
been deficient in prejudicially affecting the outcome of the appeal.
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO
{¶ 4} Notwithstanding those findings, the court of appeals reached the
merits of appellant’s claims of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, and
found that none of them was meritorious. The court relied on the standard of review
in State v. Spivey (1998), 84 Ohio St.3d 24, 25,
701 N.E.2d 696, 697, which adopted
the two-prong analysis found in Strickland v. Washington (1984),
466 U.S. 668,
104 S.Ct. 2052,
80 L.Ed.2d 674, in rejecting appellant’s six assignments of error
on their merits.
{¶ 5} The cause is now before the court upon an appeal as of right.
__________________
William D. Mason, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and Reno J.
Ordani, Jr., Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.
Shawn Martin, for appellant.
__________________
Per Curiam.
{¶ 6} Based on the reasoning set forth in its opinion, we affirm the judgment
of the court of appeals denying appellant’s application for reopening for failing to
establish a colorable claim of ineffective assistance of counsel on the part of
appellate counsel. Spivey, supra,84 Ohio St.3d at 25,
701 N.E.2d at 697. In none
of the six instances has Jells raised “a genuine issue as to whether [he] was deprived
of the effective assistance of counsel on appeal” before the court of appeals, as
required under App.R. 26(B).
Judgment affirmed.
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and
LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur.
__________________
2
