Case Name: The State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Cheren, Appellant
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1995-08-16
Citations: 73 Ohio St. 3d 137
Docket Number: No. 95-427
Parties: The State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Cheren, Appellant.
Judges: Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Wright, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Ohio State Reports, Third Service
Volume: 73
Pages: 137–138

Head Matter:
The State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Cheren, Appellant.
[Cite as State v. Cheren (1995), 73 Ohio St.3d 137.]
(No. 95-427
Submitted June 6, 1995
Decided August 16, 1995.)
Oles Cheren, pro se.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
We held in State v. Peeples (1995), 73 Ohio St.3d 149, 652 N.E.2d 717, decided today, that a prisoner has no right to file successive applications for reopening. Once ineffective assistance of counsel has been raised and adjudicated, res judicata bars its relitigation. See State v. Perry (1967), 10 Ohio St.2d 175, 39 O.O.2d 189, 226 N.E.2d 104. In this case, appellant has raised two prior claims of ineffective assistance of counsel in his prior applications to reopen. This court has already determined appellant's counsel was effective. State v. Cheren (1995), 73 Ohio St.3d 138, 652 N.E.2d 708, decided today. The judgment of the court of appeals is therefore affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Wright, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur.
Cook, J., not participating.