Case Title: State v. Dever

Citation: 1995-Ohio-115

Docket Number: 19950831

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 1995-10-11T00:00:00Z

Document:
11304 
The State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Dever, Appellant. 
1 
[Cite as State v. Dever (1995),   Ohio St.3d   .] 
2 
Appellate procedure -- Application for reopening appeal from judgment 
3 
and conviction based on claim of ineffective assistance of appellate 
4 
counsel -- Application denied when applicant fails to establish good 
5 
cause for failure to file the motion within ninety days from 
6 
journalization of the appellate judgment, as required by App.R. 
7 
26(B). 
8 
 
(No. 95-831--Submitted July 26, 1995 -- Decided October 11, 1995.) 
9 
 
Appeal from the Court of Appeals for Hamilton County, No. C-
10 
880712. 
11 
 
Appellant, Frederick M. Dever, Jr., was convicted of rape.  The court 
12 
of appeals affirmed the conviction.  State v. Dever (Jan. 31, 1990), Hamilton 
13 
App. No. C-880712, unreported 1990 WL 6405.  We overruled his motion 
14 
for leave to appeal.  State v. Dever (1990), 52 Ohio St.3d 701, 556 N.E.2d 
15 
526.  The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari, vacated the 
16 
judgment and remanded the case to the court of appeals.  Dever v. Ohio 
17 
(1990), 498 U.S. 1009, 111 S. Ct. 575, 112 L. Ed.2d 581.  The court of 
18 
appeals reversed the decision of the trial court.  The state appealed to this 
19 
court, and we reversed the judgment of the court of appeals and reinstated 
20 
 
2
the conviction and sentence.  State v. Dever (1992), 64 Ohio St. 3d 401, 596 
1 
N.E.2d 436.   
2 
 
It is undisputed that in February 1995, Dever filed with the court of 
3 
appeals an application to reopen his appeal under App.R. 26(B), alleging 
4 
ineffective assistance of his appellate counsel.  The court of appeals denied 
5 
the application, finding that appellant had failed to establish good cause for 
6 
not filing the application to reopen within ninety days from the 
7 
journalization of the appellate judgment, as required by App.R. 26(B)(2)(b).  
8 
The court of appeals also held that the judgment Dever was seeking to open 
9 
had been rendered a nullity by the United States Supreme Court and was 
10 
therefore impossible to reopen.   
11 
 
Appellant appeals the denial to this court. 
12 
____________________ 
13 
 
Joseph T. Deters, Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney, and 
14 
Christian J. Schaefer, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. 
15 
 
Frederick M. Dever, Jr., pro se. 
16 
____________________ 
17 
 
3
 
Per Curiam.  We affirm the decision of the court of appeals for the 
1 
reasons stated in its opinion. 
2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Judgment affirmed. 
3 
 
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, WRIGHT, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER 
4 
and COOK, JJ., concur. 
5 
 
6