State v. Alt, 2012 Ohio 2054

Alt pled guilty to 31 counts of a 96-count mortgage fraud indictment and was convicted.
This court affirmed that conviction in State v. Alt, 2011-Ohio-5393.
The Ohio Supreme Court denied leave to appeal and dismissed as not involving a substantial constitutional question.
Alt filed, in this court, an application for reopening under App.R. 26(B).
The application was filed April 4, 2012, well beyond the journalization date of October 20, 2011.
The court held that Alt failed to show good cause for the untimely reopening request and denied the application.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Alt showed good cause for untimely reopening.	Alt contends imprisonment and limited counsel contact constitute good cause.	Court held none of the asserted circumstances constitute good cause.	No good cause; reopening denied.
Whether appellate counsel's conduct constitutes good cause for late filing.	Lack of communications and failure to provide records justify reopening.	Such failures do not establish good cause under App.R. 26(B).	Not good cause; reopening denied.

State v. Morgan, 2007-Ohio-5532 (Ohio) (counsel nondisclosure of notices not good cause for untimely reopening)
State v. Howell, 2011-Ohio-3683 (Ohio) (appellate counsel's failure to provide transcripts not good cause)
State v. Gumm, 103 Ohio St.3d 162 (2004) (good-cause requirement is strict for reopening)
State v. LaMar, 102 Ohio St.3d 467 (2004) (timeliness and good cause standards for reopening)
State v. Almashni, 8th Dist. No. 92237 (2010) (patterns of conduct insufficient to show good cause)