State v. Fox
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals. “Under App.R. 26(B)(2)(b), an application for reopening requires ‘a showing of good cause for untimely filing if the application is filed more than ninety days after journaliza*516tion of the appellate judgment.’ ” State v. Wickline (1996), 74 Ohio St.3d 369, 371, 658 N.E.2d 1052, 1053.
The state asserts that current counsel, David H. Bodiker, Ohio Public Defender, and William S. Lazarow, Assistant Public Defender, have represented Fox since at least June 21, 1995, when they filed the petition for postconviction relief in the trial court. Fox has not…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- State v. LentzOhio Supreme Court · 1994
- State v. WicklineOhio Supreme Court · 1996
- State v. HillOhio Supreme Court · 1997
- State v. CarterOhio Supreme Court · 1994
3Cited by37 opinions
- State v. GummOhio Supreme Court · 2004
- State v. LaMarOhio Supreme Court · 2004
- George T. Franklin, Petitioner-Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Carl S. Anderson, Warden, Respondent-Appellant/cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2006
- State v. DavisOhio Supreme Court · 1999
- Colbert v. TambiDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2007
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.