Case Name: The State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Winstead, Appellant
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1996-01-10
Citations: 74 Ohio St. 3d 277
Docket Number: No. 95-816
Parties: The State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Winstead, Appellant.
Judges: Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Wright, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Cook, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Ohio State Reports, Third Service
Volume: 74
Pages: 277–278

Head Matter:
The State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Winstead, Appellant.
[Cite as State v. Winstead (1996), 74 Ohio St.3d 277.]
(No. 95-816
Submitted September 12, 1995
Decided January 10, 1996.)
Joseph T. Deters, Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney, and Philip R. Cummings, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.
David H. Bodiker, Ohio Public Defender, and Hyrum J. Mackay, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The decision of the court of appeals is affirmed. We agree that a courier's delay in delivery is not "good cause" for accepting an App.R. 26(B) application for reopening that is untimely filed. Moreover, there is. no denial of due process or equal protection in applying to this appellant a rule applicable to all appellants.
Judgment affirmed.
Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Wright, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Cook, JJ., concur.