State v. Ward - 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

The State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Ward, Appellant.
[Cite as State v. Ward (1996), _____ Ohio St.3d ____.]
Appellate procedure -- Application for reopening appeal from
judgment and conviction based on claim of ineffective
assistance of appellate counsel -- Application denied when
applicant fails to show good cause for failure to file the motion
within ninety days after journalization of the court of appeals'
decision affirming the conviction, as required by App.R.
26(B)(2)(b).

(No. 96-238 --Submitted April 15, 1996--Decided June 5, 1996.)

APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Hamilton County, Nos. C-
910878 and C-910881.

According to the state, appellant, Fredrick E. Ward, was convicted of
felonious sexual penetration and gross sexual imposition and sentenced to
prison in October 1991. In June 1992, the court of appeals affirmed his
convictions and sentence. State v. Ward (June 19, 1992), Hamilton App.
Nos. C-910878 and C-910881, unreported.

Subsequently, Ward filed with the court of appeals an application to
reopen his appeal under App.R. 26(B), which governs claims alleging
ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. The court of appeals found that

Ward had "failed to show good cause for filing his application more than
ninety days after *** judgment was journalized, as required by App.R.
26(B)(2)(b)." Hence, the court of appeals denied Ward's application. Ward
appeals that denial to this court.
__________________________

Joseph T. Deters, Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney, and Philip
R. Cummings, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.

Fredrick E. Ward, pro se.
__________________________

Per Curiam. We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals for the
reasons stated in that court's entry.

Judgment affirmed.

MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK
and STRATTON, JJ., concur.

2