Case Name: The State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Fautenberry, Appellant
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1997-04-30
Citations: 78 Ohio St. 3d 320
Docket Number: No. 96-2521
Parties: The State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Fautenberry, Appellant.
Judges: Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Ohio State Reports, Third Service
Volume: 78
Pages: 320–321

Head Matter:
The State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Fautenberry, Appellant.
[Cite as State v. Fautenberry (1997), 78 Ohio St.3d 320.]
(No. 96-2521
Submitted March 4, 1997
Decided April 30, 1997.)
Joseph T. Deters, Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney, and Ronald W. Springman, Jr., Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.
David H. Bodiker, Ohio Public Defender, Lori Ann McGinnis and Stephen P. Hardwick, Assistant Public Defenders, for appellant.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
We affirm the judgments of the court of appeals denying appellant's application for reopening and motion for reconsideration for the same reasons articulated by the court of appeals. Further, appellant has failed to establish the existence of a colorable claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel under Strickland v. Washington (1984), 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674. We reject all of appellant's propositions of law raised before this court.
Judgments affirmed.
Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.