Ohio Supreme Court, 1995

State v. Richey

State v. Richey
Ohio Supreme Court · Decided August 30, 1995 · Cook, Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Sweeney, Wright
73 Ohio St. 3d 523; 653 N.E.2d 344

State v. Richey

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

We affirm the decision of the court of appeals for the reasons stated in its opinion. Further, we reject appellant’s additional propositions of law XXIII through XXV, asserting appellant was denied the effective assistance of counsel before this court in his application for rehearing. Appellant’s 1992 appeal to this court was not a first appeal as of right; therefore, he had no constitutional right to counsel, and hence no constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel. See State v. Buell (1994), 70 Ohio St.3d 1211, 639 N.E.2d 110.

Judgment affirmed.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Cook, JJ., concur. Wright, J., dissents.

Dissenting Opinion

Wright, J.,

dissenting. I dissent for several reasons, most of which are included within Justice Herbert R. Brown’s dissent in State v. Richey (1992), 64 Ohio St.3d 353, 373. 595 N.E.2d 915, 931.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.