Case Title: State v. Zerla

Citation: 1996-Ohio-266

Docket Number: 19951687

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 1996-02-07T00:00:00Z

Document:
THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLEE, v. ZERLA, APPELLANT. 
[Cite as State v. Zerla (1996), ___ Ohio St.3d ___.] 
Appellate procedure — Application for reopening appeal from judgment and 
conviction based on claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel — 
Application denied when applicant fails to demonstrate a colorable claim 
of ineffective assistance of counsel. 
 
(No. 95-1687 — Submitted January 9, 1996 — Decided February 7, 1996.) 
 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 93APA09-
1304. 
 
Appellant, Terrance E. Zerla, was convicted of kidnapping and three counts 
of rape, but the court of appeals set aside those convictions.  State v. Zerla (Mar. 
17, 1992), Franklin App. No. 91AP-562, unreported, 1992 WL 55433.  Following 
a new trial, a jury again convicted appellant of three counts of rape and 
kidnapping.  The court of appeals affirmed those convictions, but remanded the 
cause to the trial court to clarify the sentence.  State v. Zerla (Dec. 22, 1994), 
Franklin App. No. 93APA09-1304, unreported, 1994 WL 714456, appeal 
dismissed (1995), 72 Ohio St.3d 1413, 647 N.E.2d 1387.  The court of appeals 
also separately affirmed the trial court’s denial of appellant’s motion to reconsider 
its judgment.  State v. Zerla (Dec. 22, 1994), Franklin App. No. 94APA03-350, 
unreported, 1994 WL 714458. 
 
Subsequently, appellant filed with the court of appeals an application to 
reopen his appeal under App.R. 26(B), alleging ineffective assistance of his 
appellate counsel.  The court of appeals denied the application, finding that 
appellant “failed to demonstrate a colorable claim of ineffective assistance of 
counsel.”  Appellant appeals that denial to this court. 
___________________ 
 
2
 
Michael Miller, Franklin County Prosecuting Attorney, and Steven L. 
Taylor, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. 
 
Terrance E. Zerla, pro se. 
___________________ 
 
Per Curiam.  We affirm the decision of the court of appeals for the reasons 
stated in its memorandum decision. 
Judgment affirmed. 
 
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, WRIGHT, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER and 
COOK, JJ., concur.