Case ID: ohio-st-3d_78/html/0320-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Fautenberry, Appellant.
    [Cite as State v. Fautenberry (1997), 78 Ohio St.3d 320.]
    (No. 96-2521
    Submitted March 4, 1997
    Decided April 30, 1997.)
    
      
      Joseph T. Deters, Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney, and Ronald W. Springman, Jr., Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.
    
      David H. Bodiker, Ohio Public Defender, Lori Ann McGinnis and Stephen P. Hardwick, Assistant Public Defenders, for appellant.
   Per Curiam.

We affirm the judgments of the court of appeals denying appellant’s application for reopening and motion for reconsideration for the same reasons articulated by the court of appeals. Further, appellant has failed to establish the existence of a colorable claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel under Strickland v. Washington (1984), 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674. We reject all of appellant's propositions of law raised before this court.

Judgments affirmed.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.