State of Ohio v. Paul Sabbah
Court of Appeals No. E-18-015
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT ERIE COUNTY
February 22, 2019
2019-Ohio-658
Trial Court No. 1993-CR-240
Paul Sabbah, pro se.
DECISION AND JUDGMENT
MAYLE, P.J.
{¶ 1} In this acсelerated appeal, defendant-appellant, Paul Sabbah, acting pro se, appeals the March 13, 2018 judgment of the Erie County Court of Common Pleas, denying his motion for a final, appealable оrder. For the following reasons, we affirm the trial court judgment.
{¶ 2} On July 5, 1994, following a jury trial, Paul Sabbah was convicted of the aggravated murder of Gerald Walk and was sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole after 20 years. He appealed, arguing that (1) he was denied due process when the trial court limited his cross-examination of the state‘s chief witness and denied him access to her psychiatric records, and (2) the triаl court erred by admitting other-acts testimony. We affirmed Sabbah‘s conviction. State v. Sabbah, 6th Dist. Erie No. E-94-031, 1995 Ohio App. LEXIS 3369 (Aug. 18, 1995). Sabbah sought rеview by the Ohio Supreme Court, but the court declined jurisdiction. State v. Sabbah, 74 Ohio St.3d 1498, 659 N.E.2d 314 (1996).
{¶ 3} On June 3, 2000, Sabbah filed an application for delayed reopening of his appeal. We denied Sabbah‘s motion. State v. Sabbah, 6th Dist. Erie No. E-94-031 (June 1, 2000). Again, Sabbah sought review by the Ohio Supremе Court, and again, the court declined jurisdiction. State v. Sabbah, 93 Ohio St.3d 1428, 755 N.E.2d 352 (2001).
{¶ 4} On February 8, 2017, Sabbah filed a “motion for wrongful conviction under
{¶ 6} Finally, on February 5, 2018, Sabbah filed а motion in the trial court for a final, appealable order, arguing that his judgment of conviction was void bеcause the trial judge did not sign the journal entry. The trial court denied his motion in a judgment entry journalized on March 13, 2018.1 Sаbbah appealed and assigns the following errors for our review:
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR NUMBER I:
THE CONVICTION WAS IMPOSED CONTRARY TO LAW THE STATE ADDUCED INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT APPELLANT‘S CONVICTION AND THAT THE CONVICTION IS CONTRARY TO THE MANIFEST WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE WHEN THE ORIGINAL LUCAS COUNTY CORONER‘S AUTOPSY:
236-93 STATED ON MAY 22ND, 1993 THAT THE MANNER OF DEATH WAS UNDETERMINED. [sic]
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR NUMBER II:
APPELLANT WAS DENIED A FAIR AND UNBIAS TRIAL DUE TO THE PROSECUTIONS USE OF KNOWINGLY PERJURED TESTIMONY, RESULTING IN PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT AND DISCRIMINATORY PROSECUTION DEPRIVING APPELLANT OF DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAW. [sic]
II. Law and Analysis
{¶ 7} In his assignments of error, Sabbah chаllenges the sufficiency and weight of the evidence against him, and he argues that prosecutorial miscоnduct deprived him of due process and equal protection under the law. We begin by noting that the order thаt Sabbah appealed from was the March 13, 2018 denial of his “motion for a final, appealable оrder.” That motion was premised on Sabbah‘s contention that the judgment entry of conviction lacked the signаture of the trial judge and was, therefore, void—a contention that is meritless given that the record contains a judgment entry journalized on July 5, 1994, bearing the signature of Judge Ann B. Maschari. It is unclear why Sabbah has assigned errors unrelated to the order he appealed.
{¶ 8} Nevertheless, to the extent that Sabbah challenges the suffiсiency and weight of the evidence and contends that the prosecutor engaged in misconduct, the stаte argues
{¶ 9} The doctrine of res judicata precludes any defense or any claimed lack of due process that was raised or could have been raised on an appeal from a judgment. State v. Stevens, 6th Dist. Lucas No. L-06-1128, 2006-Ohio-5358, ¶ 9. It applies to “‘any proceeding’ initiated after a final judgment of conviction and direct appeal,” including postconviction motions. State v. Reznickcheck, 6th Dist. Lucas Nos. L-04-1029, L-04-1030, 2004-Ohio-4801, ¶ 13, quoting State v. Gaston, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga App. No. 82628, 2003-Ohio-5825, ¶ 8. Res judicata prevents a criminal defendant from repeatedly attacking a final judgment based on issues that were raised or could have been raised previously. (Citations omitted.) Id.
{¶ 10} Herе, Sabbah‘s February 8, 2017, “motion for wrongful conviction under
{¶ 11} Sabbah‘s challenges to the prosecutor‘s alleged misconduct, the suffiсiency of the evidence, and the manifest weight of the evidence could have been raised in the dirеct appeal of his 1994 conviction. He is barred by the doctrine of res judicata from now raising these рurported errors. We find his two assignments of error not well-taken, and we affirm the March 13, 2018 judgment of the Erie County Court оf Common Pleas. Sabbah is ordered to pay the costs of this appeal under App.R. 24.
Judgment affirmed.
A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to App.R. 27. See also 6th Dist.Loc.App.R. 4.
Thomas J. Osowik, J.
JUDGE
Christine E. Mayle, P.J.
Gene A. Zmuda, J.
JUDGE
CONCUR.
JUDGE
This decision is subject to further editing by the Supreme Court of Ohio‘s Reporter of Decisions. Parties interested in viewing the final reported version are advised to visit the Ohio Supreme Court‘s web site at: http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/ROD/docs/.