State v. Allah, 08ca0035 (12-19-2008)
This text of 2008 Ohio 6719 (State v. Allah, 08ca0035 (12-19-2008)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
{¶ 2} Defendant timely appealed to this court from his conviction and sentence.
{¶ 3} Defendant's appellate counsel filed a brief pursuant to the rule of Anders v. California (1967),
{¶ 4} Defendant's appellate counsel has identified two possible issues for appeal.
FIRST ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR
{¶ 5} "THE ALLEGED ACTIONS OF DEFENSE COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT DURING THE HEARING DID NOT QUALIFY AS INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL UNDER LAW."
{¶ 6} Defendant raises an issue concerning whether his trial counsel performed deficiently by failing to inform him *Page 3 that Defendant's guilty plea forfeited his right to challenge the trial court's decision overruling Defendant's motion to suppress evidence on appeal.
{¶ 7} Counsel's performance will not be deemed ineffective unless and until counsel's performance is proved to have fallen below an objective standard of reasonable representation and, in addition, prejudice arises from counsel's performance. Strickland v. Washington (1984),
{¶ 8} Because the essential facts on which Defendant's claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel relies are outside the record before us, we cannot determine whether Defendant's trial counsel was ineffective for the reason cited. State v. Cooperrider (1983),
SECOND ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR
{¶ 9} "THE SENTENCING OF THE DEFENDANT-APPELLANT DURING THE HEARING OF APRIL 8, 2008 CONFORMED TO THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS OF THE STATE OF OHIO."
{¶ 10} Defendant was convicted of a first degree felony *Page 4
offense that carries a mandatory prison term of three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, or ten years in prison. R.C.
{¶ 11} In addition to reviewing the possible issues for appeal raised by Defendant's appellate counsel, we have conducted an independent review of the trial court's proceedings and have found no error having arguable merit. Accordingly, Defendant's appeal is without merit and the judgment of the trial court will be affirmed.
BROGAN, J. And DONOVAN, J., concur.
Copies mailed to:
Amy M. Smith, Esq.
David J. Cranmer, Esq.
Divine Allah
*Page 1Hon. Richard J. O'Neill
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2008 Ohio 6719, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-allah-08ca0035-12-19-2008-ohioctapp-2008.