Case Name: The State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Richardson, Appellant
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1996-01-10
Citations: 74 Ohio St. 3d 235
Docket Number: No. 95-844
Parties: The State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Richardson, 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: 235–236

Head Matter:
The State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Richardson, Appellant.
[Cite as State v. Richardson (1996), 74 Ohio St.3d 235.]
(No. 95-844
Submitted September 12, 1995
Decided January 10, 1996.)
Stephanie Tubbs Jones, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and Sherry F. McCreary, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.
David H. Bodiker, Ohio Public Defender, and Kort Gatterdam, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals. We find no injustice in applying the doctrine of res judicata on these facts. Since the date of the appellate decision sought to be reopened, appellant has appealed directly to this court and filed one application for reopening. Neither App.R. 26(B) nor State v. Murnahan (1992), 63 Ohio St.3d 60, 584 N.E.2d 1204, provides for second and subsequent applications for reopening. Therefore, the court of appeals did not err in finding that the matter of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel is now res judicata.
Judgment affirmed.
Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Wright, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Cook, JJ., concur.