[Cite as State v. Thomas, 2014-Ohio-2410.]

Court of Appeals of Ohio

EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT 

COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA 

JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION 

No. 100749

STATE OF OHIO

PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE

vs. 

CHRISTOPHER THOMAS

DEFENDANT-APPELLANT 

JUDGMENT: 

AFFIRMED 

Criminal Appeal from the 

Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas 

Case No. CR-10-535943-A 

BEFORE: S. Gallagher, J., Celebrezze, P.J., and Stewart, J. 

RELEASED AND JOURNALIZED: June 5, 2014 
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT 

Albert L. Purola 

38298 Ridge Road 

Willoughby, OH 44094 

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE

Timothy J. McGinty 

Cuyahoga County Prosecutor 

By: T. Allan Regas 

Assistant Prosecuting Attorney 

Justice Center, 8th Floor 

1200 Ontario Street 

Cleveland, OH 44113 
SEAN C. GALLAGHER, J.: 

{¶1} This is an accelerated appeal brought pursuant to App.R. 11.1 and 

Loc.App.R. 11.1. Defendant Christopher Thomas appeals from the resentencing 

mandated by this court’s decision in State v. Thomas, 197 Ohio App.3d 176, 

2011-Ohio-6073, 966 N.E.2d 939 (8th Dist.) (“Thomas I”), reversing Thomas’s sentence 

based on the failure to merge allied offenses of similar import. For the following 

reasons, we affirm. 

{¶2} The facts are undisputed. 

Thomas’s convictions in [the underlying] case result[ed] from his 

inappropriate relationships with two of his students while he was employed 

as a teacher at a middle school. The two victims were females, aged 

fourteen and thirteen. Thomas had a sexual encounter with the younger 

girl. He also sent sexually-explicit electronic messages to the girls, and 

convinced the girls to take sexually-explicit photographs of themselves and 

to send those photographs to his cell phone; he then transferred the images 

to his computer. 

Id. at ¶ 5. 

{¶3} In the current appeal, Thomas claims that his appellate counsel was 

ineffective in Thomas I and that there are insufficient facts to support his conviction 

entered upon a no-contest plea. We find no merit to either argument. “Res judicata bars 

the assertion of claims against a valid, final judgment of conviction that have been raised 

or could have been raised on appeal.” State v. Ketterer, 126 Ohio St.3d 448, 

2010-Ohio-3831, 935 N.E.2d 9, ¶ 59, citing State v. Perry, 10 Ohio St.2d 175, 226 

N.E.2d 104 (1967), paragraph nine of the syllabus. Thomas’s claims could have been 

raised in Thomas I and any post-dispositive process available through his direct appeal, 
such as an application to reopen the appeal pursuant to App.R. 26(B). Thomas’s claims 

are overruled. 

{¶4} Finding no merit to Thomas’s two assigned errors, we affirm the decision of 

the trial court. 

It is ordered that appellee recover from appellant costs herein taxed. 

The court finds there were no reasonable grounds for this appeal. 

It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this court directing the common 

pleas court to carry this judgment into execution. Case remanded to the trial court for 

execution of sentence. 

A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of 

the Rules of Appellate Procedure. 

SEAN C. GALLAGHER, JUDGE 

FRANK D. CELEBREZZE, JR., P.J., and 

MELODY J. STEWART, J., CONCUR