Legal Opinion

State v. Davis, 05 Ma 3 (12-27-2007)

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided December 27, 2007No. 05 MA 3PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND JOURNAL ENTRY

{¶ 1} Appellant Jack Davis has filed an application to reopen his direct appeal pursuant to App.R. 26(B)(5), which states: "An application for reopening shall be granted if there is a genuine issue as to whether the applicant was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel on appeal."

{¶ 2} Appellant argues that he was denied the effective assistance of appellate counsel because his counsel failed to prepare effective arguments on appeal. He claims that his appellate counsel failed to raise on appeal that his trial counsel erred when he failed to object to…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. State v. MurnahanOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  3. State v. RojasOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  4. State v. SheppardOhio Supreme Court · 2001
  5. State v. LechnerOhio Supreme Court · 1995

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. McKinnonOhio Court of Appeals · 2018
  2. State v. DavisOhio Court of Appeals · 2011

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

Powered by the Exa API