State v. McClendon
2013 Ohio 5881
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- McClendon filed a motion to reconsider the court's October 29, 2013 denial of his untimely application to reopen his direct appeal.
- App.R. 26(A)(1)(a) requires a written reconsideration within 10 days after mailing of the judgment and docket notation of mailing.
- The clerk mailed the judgment on October 30, 2013; the 10-day window expired on November 12, 2013 due to a weekend and a holiday on November 11, 2013.
- McClendon filed his reconsideration on November 13, 2013, making it one day late.
- The appellate court held that untimely reconsideration is generally denied and that reconsideration is not appropriate to merely relitigate issues or to add new arguments.
- The court also concluded that McClendon failed to establish good cause to reopen his appeal, a prerequisite for reconsideration.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of the reconsideration motion | McClendon contends timely reconsideration should be considered. | Untimely filing as to App.R. 26(A) control of deadline. | Untimely; denied. |
| Whether reconsideration is appropriate to address new arguments | Alleges a point not previously addressed warrants reconsideration. | Reconsideration not for mere disagreement with decision or new arguments. | Not appropriate; denied. |
| Good cause standard for reopening | Now asserts good cause to reopen; argues error or merit not previously considered. | Failure to establish good cause; supports denial of reopening. | No good cause shown; reconsideration denied on merits-related rationale. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Hess, 7th Dist. No. 02 JE 36, 2004-Ohio-1197 (Ohio App.3d 2004) (untimely reconsideration generally denied; standard for timely reconsideration)
- Scott v. Falcon Transport Co., 7th Dist. No. 02 CA 145, 2004-Ohio-389 (Ohio App.3d 2004) (denying reconsideration where filed more than ten days after decision)
- Columbus v. Hodge, 37 Ohio App.3d 68, 523 N.E.2d 515 (1987) (application for reconsideration must call to attention an obvious error or overlooked issue)
- State v. Owens, 112 Ohio App.3d 334, 678 N.E.2d 956 (1996) (reconsideration not the vehicle to relitigate issues or disagree with appellate reasoning)
- State v. Thompson, 7th Dist. No. 97-JE-40, 2003-Ohio-1607 (Ohio) (failure to establish good cause supports denial of reopening)