State v. Sabo - Ohio Supreme Court Opinion - Ohio Supreme Court Decision

	ROMINGER LEGAL
		Ohio Court Cases and Opinions - Ohio Legal Research
					Need Legal Help?
					Need Legal Help?
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER			LEGAL HEADLINES - CASE LAW - LEGAL FORMS	NOT FINDING WHAT YOU NEED? -RESEARCH

This court case was taken from the web sites of the Ohio Courts. Search our site for more cases - CLICK HERE

LEGAL RESEARCH

COURT REPORTERS

PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS

PROCESS SERVERS

DOCUMENT RETRIEVERS

EXPERT WITNESSES

Find a Private Investigator

Find an Expert Witness

Find a Process Server

Case Law - save on Lexis / WestLaw.

Legal News - Legal Headlines

1 The State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Sabo, Appellant.
2 [Cite as State v. Sabo (1996), _____ Ohio St.3d _____.]
3 Appellate procedure -- Application for reopening appeal from
4
judgment and conviction based on claim of ineffective
5
assistance of appellate counsel -- Application denied when
6
there is no showing that appellate counsel violated any
7
essential duties in representing applicant, or that applicant
8
was prejudiced by counsel's representation on appeal.
9
(No. 96-661--Submitted May 21, 1996--Decided July 17, 1996.)
10
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Athens County, No. 1273.
11
In March 1985, appellant, Larry Sabo, was convicted of complicity in
12 aggravated murder and complicity in attempted aggravated murder.
13 Appellant was thereafter sentenced to consecutive terms of imprisonment.
14 Upon appeal, the convictions were affirmed. State v. Sabo (Sept. 5, 1986),
15 Athens App. No. 1273, unreported. Appellant's appeal to this court was
16 dismissed sua sponte. State v. Sabo (Mar. 11, 1987), case No. 86-1605.
17
According to the parties, on January 30, 1996, appellant filed an
18 application for reopening before the court of appeals pursuant to App.R.
19 26(B), alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. The court of
20 appeals denied the application, finding that there was no showing that

1 appellate counsel violated any essential duties in representing appellant, or
2 that appellant was prejudiced by appellate counsel's representation on
3 appeal. This appeal followed.
4
William R. Biddlestone, Athens County Prosecuting Attorney, and
5 Birgit Pedersen, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.
6
Larry Sabo, pro se.
7
Per Curiam. We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals for the
8 reasons set forth in its decision and judgment entry.
9
Judgment affirmed.
10
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK
11 and STRATTON, JJ., concur.
12

2