State v. Bennett, 90815 (1-26-2009)
State v. Bennett, 90815 (1-26-2009)
Opinion of the Court
{¶ 2} Initially, we find that App. R. 26(B) is not applicable to the facts pertinent to Bennett's appeal. No appellate judgment, which reviewed Bennett's plea of guilty to four counts of involuntary manslaughter, has been announced and journalized by *Page 3
this court. Thus, we are prevented from considering Bennett's application for reopening brought pursuant to App. R. 26(B). State v.Skaggs (May 12, 1999), Cuyahoga App. No. 76301, reopening disallowed (Sept. 21, 1999), Motion No. 7505. See, also, State v. Loomer,
{¶ 3} In addition, an application for reopening may be granted by this court only upon a showing that there exists a genuine issue as to whether the applicant was deprived of the effective assistance of appellate counsel on appeal. See App. R. 26(B)(5). No appellate counsel was involved in the underlying appeal, since Bennett filed a motion for a delayed appeal, pro se. Thus, Bennett cannot establish a claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. State v. McCauley, Cuyahoga App. No. 81328,
{¶ 4} Accordingly, we deny the application for reopening.
*Page 1CHRISTINE T. McMONAGLE, P.J., and MARY J. BOYLE, J., CONCUR.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.