Legal Opinion
State v. Murnahan
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided February 19, 1992No. Nos. 90-2287 and 90-2288PublishedCited by 526 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHolmes, J.
The issue certified to this court is whether a claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel is cognizable in post-conviction proceedings brought pursuant to R.C. 2953.21. For the reasons that follow, we answer such query in the negative.
It is asserted by Murnahan that R.C. 2953.21 is the appropriate vehicle by which to bring claims of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. R.C. 2953.21 provides in pertinent part:
“(A) Any person convicted of a criminal offense or adjudged delinquent claiming that there was such a denial or infringement of his rights as to render the judgment void…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Penson v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- State v. PerryOhio Supreme Court · 1967
- Paul R. Manning v. George AlexanderCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1990
- State v. MitchellOhio Court of Appeals · 1988
- In re Brown for Writ of Habeas Corpus Ad ProsequendumOhio Supreme Court · 1990
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by526 opinions
- James Yates Rust, Jr., A/K/A James Yeats Rust, Jr. v. Rex A. Zent, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1994
- John W. Byrd, Jr. v. Terry L. Collins, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2000
- Jerry McMeans v. Anthony J. Brigano, Warden,respondent-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2000
- Alton Coleman v. Betty Mitchell, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2001
- Paul W. Greer v. Betty Mitchell, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2001
521 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.