Title: State v. Sanders

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

The State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Sanders, Appellant.  
1 
[Cite as State v. Sanders (1996), _____ Ohio St.3d _____.] 
2 
Appellate procedure -- Application for reopening appeal from 
3 
judgment and conviction based on claim of ineffective 
4 
assistance of appellate counsel -- Application denied when 
5 
applicant fails to establish the existence of a colorable claim of 
6 
ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. 
7 
 
(No. 96-205--Submitted May 7, 1996--Decided June 19, 1996.) 
8 
 
Appeal from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County, No. 67844. 
9 
 
Appellant, John Sanders, Jr.,  was convicted on two counts of 
10 
aggravated robbery, and sentenced to terms of imprisonment.  Upon appeal, 
11 
the convictions were affirmed.  State v. Sanders (May 18, 1995), Cuyahoga 
12 
App. No. 67844, unreported. 
13 
 
Subsequently, appellant filed an application for reopening before the 
14 
court of appeals pursuant to App. R. 26(B), alleging ineffective assistance 
15 
of appellate counsel.  The court of appeals denied the application on 
16 
December 12, 1995, and held that the doctrine of res judicata prohibited the 
17 
reopening of his original appeal, because appellant could have raised the 
18 
 
2
issue of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel on direct appeal to this 
1 
court, but did not file such an appeal.  This appeal followed. 
2 
______________________________ 
3 
 
Stephanie Tubbs Jones, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and 
4 
Sherry F. McCreary, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. 
5 
 
David H. Bodiker, Ohio Public Defender, and Timi J. Townsend, 
6 
Assistant Public Defender, for appellant. 
7 
______________________________ 
8 
 
Per Curiam.  We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals denying 
9 
appellant’s application for reopening.  Appellant has failed to establish the 
10 
existence of a colorable claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel 
11 
under Strickland v. Washington (1984), 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 
12 
L.Ed.2d 674. 
13 
Judgment affirmed. 
14 
 
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK 
15 
and STRATTON, JJ., concur. 
16 
 
17