Case Title: State v. Williams

Citation: 2011-Ohio-232

Docket Number: 20100849

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 2011-01-26T00:00:00Z

Document:
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as 
State v. Williams, Slip Opinion No. 2011-Ohio-232.] 
 
 
NOTICE 
This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in 
an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports.  Readers are requested 
to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 
65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typographical or 
other formal errors in the opinion, in order that corrections may be 
made before the opinion is published. 
 
SLIP OPINION NO. 2011-OHIO-232 
THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLEE, v. WILLIAMS, APPELLANT. 
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it 
may be cited as State v. Williams, Slip Opinion No. 2011-Ohio-232.] 
Criminal law — Untimely application to reopen direct appeal — No good cause 
found — Judgment affirmed. 
(No. 2010-0849 — Submitted January 19, 2011 — Decided January 26, 2011) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Trumbull County, No. 89-T-4210. 
____________ 
 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} Appellant, Andre Williams, challenges the denial of his application 
to reopen his direct appeal pursuant to App.R. 26(B). 
{¶ 2} In August 1988, George and Katherine Melnick were attacked in 
their home in Warren, Ohio.  Appellant was convicted of, and sentenced to death 
for, the aggravated murder of George Melnick.  The court of appeals affirmed his 
convictions and death sentence but reversed that portion of the conviction that 
was based on the underlying felony of attempted rape.  State v. Williams (Mar. 24, 
1995), Trumbull App. No. 89-T-4210, 1995 WL 237092, *50.  We reversed the 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
 
judgment of the court of appeals in part but affirmed the appellant’s convictions 
and sentence.  State v. Williams (1996), 74 Ohio St.3d 569, 660 N.E.2d 724, 
certiorari denied, Williams v. Ohio (1996), 519 U.S. 835, 117 S.Ct. 109, 136 
L.Ed.2d 62.  On his appeal to the court of appeals and subsequently to this court, 
appellant was represented by Thomas E. Zena and Gary L. Van Brocklin. 
{¶ 3} In September 1996, appellant filed his first petition for 
postconviction relief.  The trial court denied his petition, and the court of appeals 
affirmed.  State v. Williams (Oct. 16, 1998), Trumbull App. No. 97-T-0153.  We 
declined to accept jurisdiction of his appeal.  State v. Williams (1999), 85 Ohio 
St.3d 1406, 706 N.E.2d 788.  Appellant was represented by John B. Juhasz during 
those appeals. 
{¶ 4} In June 2003, appellant filed a successive petition for 
postconviction relief and asserted that his death sentence was void or voidable 
because he is mentally retarded pursuant to Atkins v. Virginia (2002), 536 U.S. 
304, 122 S.Ct. 2242, 153 L.Ed.2d 335, and State v. Lott, 97 Ohio St.3d 303, 2002-
Ohio-6625, 779 N.E.2d 1011.  On September 11, 2007, the trial court granted the 
state’s motion for summary judgment, and the court of appeals affirmed.  State v. 
Williams, 2008-Ohio-3257, ¶ 17, 44.  On December 31, 2008, this court declined 
to accept jurisdiction of his appeal.  State v. Williams, 120 Ohio St.3d 1453, 2008-
Ohio-6813, 898 N.E.2d 968.  Appellant was also represented by Juhasz during 
that appeal. 
{¶ 5} Following our decision, appellant – now represented by the Office 
of the Federal Public Defender – filed an application with the court of appeals to 
reopen his initial appeal pursuant to App.R. 26(B).  App.R. 26(B)(5) requires that 
the applicant show a “genuine issue as to whether the applicant was deprived of 
the effective assistance of counsel on appeal.”  Appellant claimed that he had 
been denied effective assistance by reason of his appellate counsel’s failure to 
raise certain issues.  The court of appeals denied appellant’s application for 
January Term, 2011 
3 
 
reopening as untimely.  State v. Williams (Mar. 29, 2010), Trumbull App. No. 89-
T-4210.  He now appeals from that denial. 
{¶ 6} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.  Appellant  did not 
comply with App.R. 26(B)(1), which requires that an application for reopening be 
filed “within ninety days from journalization of the appellate judgment unless the 
applicant shows good cause for filing at a later time.”  Appellant waited more 
than ten years to file his application. 
{¶ 7} Appellant argues that he had good cause for missing the 90-day 
deadline set by the rule, because he is mentally retarded and was unable to 
prepare and present the application for reopening pro se.  However, we reject this 
argument in light of the judicial determination that the appellant is not mentally 
retarded.  Williams, 2008-Ohio-3257, ¶ 38, 44. 
{¶ 8} Appellant also argues that he had good cause because he had no 
counsel to call on to file his application for reopening.  He asserts that his existing 
counsel’s discovery of errors was the first opportunity he had to raise the 
appellate issues that his counsel failed to raise on direct appeal.  However, 
appellant’s postconviction counsel could have also raised these errors.  Moreover, 
there is no right to counsel on an application to reopen.  Morgan v. Eads, 104 
Ohio St.3d 142, 2004-Ohio-6110, 818 N.E.2d 1157, ¶ 21-22.  Thus, lack of 
counsel cannot be accepted as good cause for the late filing of Williams’s 
application.  See State v. Hancock, 108 Ohio St.3d 194, 2006-Ohio-658, 842 
N.E.2d 497, ¶ 9; State v. Twyford, 106 Ohio St.3d 176, 2005-Ohio-4380, 833 
N.E.2d 289, ¶ 8. 
{¶ 9} Appellant raises three other propositions of law in his brief, but 
because his application was untimely, those issues cannot be considered. 
Judgment affirmed. 
 
O’CONNOR, C.J., and LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’DONNELL, LANZINGER, 
CUPP, and MCGEE BROWN, JJ., concur. 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
4 
 
 
PFEIFER, J., dissents and would reverse the judgment of the court of 
appeals. 
__________________ 
 
Dennis Watkins, Trumbull County Prosecuting Attorney, and LuWayne 
Annos, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. 
 
Alan C. Rossman and Jillian S. Davis, Office of the Federal Public 
Defender, for appellant. 
__________________