Case Title: State v. Cheren

Citation: 1995-Ohio-140

Docket Number: 19950038

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 1995-08-16T00:00:00Z

Document:
OPINIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO                               
     The full texts of the opinions of the Supreme Court of                      
Ohio are being transmitted electronically beginning May 27,                      
1992, pursuant to a pilot project implemented by Chief Justice                   
Thomas J. Moyer.                                                                 
     Please call any errors to the attention of the Reporter's                   
Office of the Supreme Court of Ohio.  Attention:  Walter S.                      
Kobalka, Reporter, or Deborah J. Barrett, Administrative                         
Assistant.  Tel.:  (614) 466-4961; in Ohio 1-800-826-9010.                       
Your comments on this pilot project are also welcome.                            
     NOTE:  Corrections may be made by the Supreme Court to the                  
full texts of the opinions after they have been released                         
electronically to the public.  The reader is therefore advised                   
to check the bound volumes of Ohio St.3d published by West                       
Publishing Company for the final versions of these opinions.                     
The advance sheets to Ohio St.3d will also contain the volume                    
and page numbers where the opinions will be found in the bound                   
volumes of the Ohio Official Reports.                                            
                                                                                 
The State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Cheren, Appellant.                               
[Cite as State v. Cheren (1995),       Ohio St.3d      .]                        
Appellate procedure -- Successive application for reopening                      
     appeal from judgment and conviction based on claim of                       
     ineffective assistance of appellate counsel -- Application                  
     denied because App.R. 26(B) makes no provision for                          
     successive applications to reopen.                                          
     (No. 95-0038 -- Submitted April 18, 1995 -- Decided August                  
16, 1995.)                                                                       
     Appeal from the Court of Appeals for Summit County, No.                     
15752.                                                                           
     Appellant, Oles Cheren, was convicted of abduction,                         
attempted rape and gross sexual imposition.  The Court of                        
Appeals for Summit County affirmed the judgment of the trial                     
court.  State v. Cheren (July 21, 1993), Summit App. No. 15752,                  
unreported, 1993 WL 278168.                                                      
     Appellant filed an application to reopen the appellate                      
judgment pursuant to App. R. 26(B), arguing ineffective                          
assistance of appellate counsel.  The application was denied by                  
the court of appeals.  The appellate court found that a failure                  
to object to every error in the record did not constitute                        
ineffective assistance of counsel.  State v. Cheren (Sept. 14,                   
1993), Summit App. No. 15752, unreported.                                        
     On October 27, 1994, appellant filed another application                    
to reopen, again arguing ineffective assistance of appellate                     
counsel.  To show good cause for the thirteen-month delay,                       
appellant stated that his appellate counsel had recently                         
admitted that she filed his appeal without a complete trial                      
transcript.  On December 2, 1994, the court of appeals ruled                     
that the appellant had failed to show good cause for untimely                    
filing, and denied the second application to reopen.                             
                                                                                 
     Maureen O'Connor, Summit County Prosecuting Attorney, and                   
William D. Wellemeyer, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for                       
appellee.                                                                        
     Oles Cheren, pro se.                                                        
                                                                                 
     Per Curiam.  The decision of the court of appeals denying                   
this successive application is affirmed on the basis of State                    
v. Peeples (1995), 73 Ohio St.3d          ,      N.E.2d     ,                    
decided today.                                                                   
                                  Judgment affirmed.                             
     Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Wright, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and                     
Pfeifer, JJ., concur.                                                            
     Cook, J., not participating.