Case Title: State v. Wogenstahl

Citation: 1996-Ohio-57

Docket Number: 19951165

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 1996-03-06T00:00:00Z

Document:
The State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Wogenstahl, Appellant. 
[Cite as State v. Wogenstahl (1996), _____ Ohio St.3d _____.] 
Appellate procedure -- Application for reopening appeal from 
judgment and conviction based on claim of ineffective 
assistance of appellate counsel -- Applicant’s notice of appeal 
to Supreme Court divests court of appeals of jurisdiction to 
rule upon application to reopen -- S.Ct.Prac.R. II(2)(D)(1), 
applied -- Claims asserting ineffective assistance of appellate 
counsel in capital cases must be raised on direct appeal to 
Supreme Court, unless capital defendant “shows good cause 
for filing at a later time.” 
 
(No. 95-1165--Submitted September 12, 1995--Decided March 6, 
1996.) 
 
Appeal from the Court of Appeals for Hamilton County, No. C-
930222. 
 
Appellant, Jeffrey A. Wogenstahl, was convicted of aggravated 
murder, kidnapping and aggravated burglary, and sentenced to death. The 
Court of Appeals for Hamilton County affirmed the judgment of the trial 
court.  State v. Wogenstahl (Nov. 30, 1994), Hamilton App. No. C-930222, 
unreported, 1994 WL 686898.  On January 9, 1995, appellant filed an 
appeal as of right before this court on the merits (case No. 95-42).  This 
appeal, pending subsequent to oral argument on November 15, 1995, is 
announced today. 
 
According to the parties, on February 24, 1995, appellant filed, pro 
se, an application before the court of appeals to reopen his appeal pursuant 
to App.R. 26(B), arguing ineffective assistance of appellate counsel.  On 
 
2
May 23, 1995, the court of appeals denied appellant’s application to reopen 
for lack of jurisdiction pursuant to S.Ct.Prac.R. II(2)(D)(1).  The court of 
appeals noted that under State v. Murnahan (1992), 63 Ohio St.3d 60, 584 
N.E.2d 1204, paragraph two of the syllabus, appellant’s claims of 
ineffective assistance of appellate counsel may be raised on his direct appeal 
to this court. 
 
Appellant now appeals the denial to this court. 
 
 
 
_____________________________ 
 
Joseph T. Deters, Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney, and 
William E. Breyer, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. 
 
Jeffrey A. Wogenstahl, pro se. 
 
 
 
______________________________ 
 
Per Curiam.  The determinative question before this court is whether 
the court of appeals erred in dismissing appellant’s application to reopen for 
lack of jurisdiction.  S.Ct.Prac.R. II(2)(D)(1) states:  “After an appeal is 
perfected from a court of appeals to the Supreme Court, the court of appeals 
is divested of jurisdiction, except to take action in aid of the appeal, to rule 
on an application for reconsideration filed with the court of appeals 
pursuant to Rule 26 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure, or to rule on a 
motion to certify a conflict under Article IV, Section 3(B)(4) of the Ohio 
Constitution.” 
 
Under the clear language of the foregoing rule, appellant’s notice of 
appeal to this court divested the court of appeals of jurisdiction to rule upon 
his application to reopen.  Accordingly, the court of appeals properly 
dismissed appellant’s application. 
 
3
 
We also note that in response to our decision in Murnahan, supra, the 
July 1, 1993 amendment to App.R. 26(B) has created an “Application for 
Reopening” to raise ineffective assistance of appellate counsel claims in the 
court of appeals.  Accordingly, claims asserting ineffective assistance of 
appellate counsel in capital cases must be raised on direct appeal to this 
court, unless the capital defendant “shows good cause for filing at a later 
time.”  App.R. 26(B)(1). 
 
The judgment of the court of appeals is therefore affirmed. 
Judgment affirmed. 
 
MOYER, C.J., WRIGHT, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER and COOK, 
JJ., concur. 
 
DOUGLAS, J., concurs in judgment only.