History
  • No items yet
midpage
State v. Jackson
2016 Ohio 7474
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2016
|
Check Treatment
Case Information

*1 [Cite as State v. Jackson , 2016-Ohio-7474.]

Court of Appeals of Ohio

EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 100877 STATE OF OHIO PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE vs.

HARRISON JACKSON

DEFENDANT-APPELLANT JUDGMENT: APPLICATION DENIED Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case No. CR-13-574810-A Application for Reopening Motion No. 498297 RELEASE DATE: October 21, 2016 *2 FOR APPELLANT

Harrison Jackson, pro se

Inmate No. A650980

Lake Erie Correctional Institution

P.O. Box 8000

Conneaut, Ohio 44030

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE

Timothy J. McGinty

Cuyahoga County Prosecutor

By: Denise J. Salerno

Assistant County Prosecutor

9th Floor Justice Center

1200 Ontario Street

Cleveland, Ohio 44113

EILEEN T. GALLAGHER, J.:

{¶1} Harrison Jackson has filed an application for reopening pursuant to App.R. 26(B). Jackson is attempting to reopen the appellate judgment rendered in State v. Jackson , 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 100877, 2014-Ohio-5137, that affirmed his conviction for the offenses of rape (R.C. 2907.02(A)(2)) and kidnapping (R.C. 2905.01(A)(4)), but vacated the order of classification as a sexual predator and the imposition of an indefinite sentence of incarceration, and remanded to the trial court to conduct a sexual offender classification hearing and resentencing. We decline to reopen Jackson’s appeal.

{¶2} Jackson has failed to comply with App.R. 26(B)(2)(d), which mandates that the applicant must attach to the application for reopening “a sworn statement of the basis for the claim that appellate counsel’s representation was deficient.” State v. Doles , 75 Ohio St.3d 604, 665 N.E.2d 197 (1996); State v. Lechner , 72 Ohio St.3d 374, 650 N.E.2d 449 (1995); State v. Bates , 8th Dist. Cuyahoga Nos. 97631, 97632, 97633, and 97634, 2015-Ohio-4176. In addition, App.R. 26(B)(2)(c) mandates that the application for reopening

must contain “[o]ne or more assignments of error or arguments in support of assignments of error that were not considered on the merits * * * by any appellate court.” Herein, Jackson has not presented this court with any proposed assignments of error or arguments that demonstrate a claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. Jackson’s failure to clearly state any assignments of error that should have been argued on appeal and the *4 failure to demonstrate a colorable claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel renders his application for reopening fatally defective. State v. Spivey , 84 Ohio St.3d 24, 1998-Ohio-704, 701 N.E.2d 696; State v. Reed , 74 Ohio St.3d 534, 1996-Ohio-21, 660 N.E.2d 45. Accordingly, the application for reopening is denied.

EILEEN T. GALLAGHER, JUDGE

MARY EILEEN KILBANE, P.J., and

MELODY J. STEWART, J., CONCUR

Case Details

Case Name: State v. Jackson
Court Name: Ohio Court of Appeals
Date Published: Oct 21, 2016
Citation: 2016 Ohio 7474
Docket Number: 100877
Court Abbreviation: Ohio Ct. App.
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.