State v. Johnson - 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. Johnson, Appellant.
2 [Cite as State v. Johnson (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
applicant fails to establish a genuine issue as to whether he
7
was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel on appeal,
8
as required by App.R. 26(B)(5).
9
(No. 96-576 -- Submitted July 10, 1996 -- Decided August 21, 1996.)
10
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Montgomery County, No.
11 13981.
12
Appellant, Bruce A. Johnson, was convicted of aggravated robbery
13 and five counts of kidnapping, and each charge included a firearm
14 specification. The trial court sentenced Johnson to prison, and the court of
15 appeals affirmed the conviction. State v. Johnson (Feb. 10, 1995),
16 Montgomery App. No. 13981, unreported, 1995 WL 51069, appeal not
17 allowed (1995), 74 Ohio St.3d 1408, 655 N.E.2d 186.
18
In May 1995, Johnson filed with the court of appeals an application to
19 reopen his appeal under App.R. 26(B), alleging ineffective assistance of
20 appellate counsel. The court of appeals denied Johnson's application to

1 reopen, finding that the state had refuted each of Johnson's claims. Johnson
2 now appeals that denial to this court.
3
____________________________________
4
Mathias H. Heck, Jr., Montgomery County Prosecuting Attorney, and
5 George A. Katchmer, Jr., Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.
6
Bruce A. Johnson, pro se.
7
_____________________________________
8
Per Curiam. We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.
9 Appellant has failed to establish "a genuine issue as to whether the applicant
10 was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel on appeal," as required
11 by App.R. 26(B)(5).
12

Judgment affirmed.
13
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK
14 and STRATTON, JJ., concur.
15

2