Title: State v. Blankenship

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

The State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Blankenship, Appellant. 
1 
[Cite as State v. Blankenship (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 -- Aplication denied when no 
5 
genuine issue whether applicant was deprived of effective 
6 
assistance of appellate counsel is present. 
7 
 
(No. 95-1923--Submitted November 14, 1995-- Decided February 14, 
8 
1996.) 
9 
 
Appeal from the Court of Appeals for Butler County, No. CA94-05-
10 
118. 
11 
 
Appellant, Darryl J. Blankenship, was convicted of three counts of 
12 
having weapons while under disability in violation of R.C. 2923.13, with 
13 
specifications under R.C. 2929.71.  The court of appeals affirmed.  State v. 
14 
Blankenship (1995), 102 Ohio App.3d 534, 657 N.E.2d 559, appeal denied, 
15 
73 Ohio St.3d 1426, 652 N.E.2d 799. 
16 
 
In June 1995, appellant filed with the court of appeals an application 
17 
to reopen his appeal under App.R. 26(B), alleging ineffective assistance of 
18 
his appellate counsel.  The court of appeals denied the application, finding 
19 
“no genuine issue as to whether appellant was deprived of the effective 
1 
assistance of counsel on appeal.” 
2 
 
Appellant appeals the denial to this court. 
3 
 
John F. Holcomb, Butler County Prosecuting Attorney, and Richard 
4 
A. Hyde, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. 
5 
 
Darryl J. Blankenship, pro se. 
6 
 
Per Curiam.  We affirm the court of appeals for the reasons stated in 
7 
its entry. 
8 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Judgment affirmed. 
9 
 
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, WRIGHT, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER 
10 
and COOK, JJ., concur. 
11 
 
12