Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State v. Fain

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided June 4, 2010No. Nos. C-080830 and C-080832Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partCunningham, Presiding Judge

{¶ 11} I concur in the majority’s holding that appellate counsel was not ineffective in failing to assign as error either the sufficiency of the evidence or trial counsel’s effectiveness in investigating or advancing unspecified “reversible errors.” And I concur in its judgment to the extent that it reopens the appeals based on appellate counsel’s ineffectiveness in failing to assign as error the unauthorized driver’s license suspension imposed as part of Fain’s sentence for having weapons while under a disability. But I dissent from its judgment to the extent that it here decides the…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. State v. SaxonOhio Supreme Court · 2006
  2. State v. MurnahanOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  3. State v. JordanOhio Supreme Court · 2004
  4. State v. BezakOhio Supreme Court · 2007
  5. State v. SimpkinsOhio Supreme Court · 2008

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API