Case Title: State v. Beard

Citation: 1994-Ohio-53

Docket Number: 19941436

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 1994-12-07T00:00:00Z

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. Beard, Appellant.                                
[Cite as State v. Beard (1994),        Ohio St.3d      .]                        
Appellate procedure -- Appeal from denial of late motion for                     
     reconsideration pursuant to App.R. 26(A) denied, when.                      
     (No. 94-1436 -- Submitted October 11, 1994 -- Decided                       
December 7, 1994.)                                                               
     Appeal from the Court of Appeals for Medina County, No.                     
2170-M.                                                                          
     According to the appellate court decisions, appellant                       
Brian Beard was convicted of aggravated robbery, theft, and                      
complicity to commit aggravated robbery.  He appealed, and the                   
court of appeals affirmed the convictions.  State v Beard (Oct.                  
7, 1992), Medina App. No. 2093-M, unreported.  This court                        
overruled the jurisdictional motion for appeal on February 24,                   
1993.  State v. Beard (1993), 66 Ohio St.3d 1420, 607 N.E.2d                     
843.                                                                             
     On June 18, 1992, appellant filed a motion for new trial,                   
which was denied by the trial court on September 16, 1992, and                   
that denial was affirmed on appeal.  State v. Beard (May 19,                     
1993), Medina App. No. 2170-M, unreported.  Thereafter                           
(appellee alleges on or about April 15, 1994) appellant filed                    
either a motion for delayed reconsideration or a "motion for                     
leave to plead a delayed appeal to redress a manifest                            
miscarriage of justice/or applicable motion for relief."                         
Apparently, that motion was denied by the court of appeals on                    
or about May 18, 1994; appellant then filed a notice of appeal                   
to this court, which this court treated as an appeal as of                       
right of a denial of a motion to reopen the case because of                      
ineffective assistance of appellate counsel pursuant to App. R.                  
26(B).  See Administrative Docket (Aug. 17, 1993), 67 Ohio                       
St.3d 1430, 616 N.E.2d 1114 ("Appeals to the Supreme Court                       
taken pursuant to State v. Murnahan [1992], 63 Ohio St.3d 60,                    
584 N.E.2d 1204, shall be treated and docketed like direct                       
appeals.").                                                                      
                                                                                 
     Dean Holman, Medina County Prosecuting Attorney, and John                   
J. Dolatowski, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.                     
     Brian Beard, pro se.                                                        
                                                                                 
     Per Curiam.  Upon further examination of the pleadings,                     
the court finds that the "Memorandum in Support of                               
Jurisdiction" attempts to combine an appeal as of right                          
following the denial of a motion to reopen a case for                            
ineffective assistance of counsel pursuant to App. R. 26(B)                      
(Proposition 2) with an appeal from the denial of a late motion                  
for reconsideration pursuant to App. R. 26(A), from which there                  
is no appeal as of right.  Insofar as appellant's memorandum is                  
in support of jurisdiction over a claimed appeal as of right                     
and in support of a motion for leave to appeal a decision under                  
App. R. 26(A), we dismiss the appeal as not involving a                          
substantial constitutional question and deny leave to appeal.                    
Insofar as the memorandum attempts to appeal the question of                     
ineffective assistance of appellate counsel under App. R.                        
26(B), the decision of the court of appeals is affirmed.                         
                                    Judgment accordingly.                        
     Moyer, C.J., A.W. Sweeney, Douglas, Wright, Resnick, F.E.                   
Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur.