Case Name: The State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Foster, Appellant
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1996-06-05
Citations: 75 Ohio St. 3d 556
Docket Number: No. 95-2631
Parties: The State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Foster, Appellant.
Judges: Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Stratton, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Ohio State Reports, Third Service
Volume: 75
Pages: 556–557

Head Matter:
The State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Foster, Appellant.
[Cite as State v. Foster (1996), 75 Ohio St.3d 556.]
(No. 95-2631
Submitted April 15, 1996
Decided June 5, 1996.)
Mark C. Fleegle, Muskingum County Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.
William H. Foster, pro se.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals, since appellant has failed to demonstrate "a genuine issue as to whether [he] was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel on appeal." App.R. 26(B)(5).
Judgment affirmed.
Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Stratton, JJ., concur.