History
  • No items yet
midpage
State v. Henry
71 Ohio St. 3d 564
Ohio
1995
Check Treatment
Per Curiam.

Appellant in his application to the court of appeals essentially stated that appellate counsel did not argue his case the way appellant thought he should have, or the way appellant himself would have argued it. This is not the standard for ineffective assistance of counsel. The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed for the reasons stated in its entry denying the application for reopening.

Judgment affirmed.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Wright, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Cook, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: State v. Henry
Court Name: Ohio Supreme Court
Date Published: Feb 22, 1995
Citation: 71 Ohio St. 3d 564
Docket Number: No. 94-2175
Court Abbreviation: Ohio
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.