State v. Blankenship

Ohio Supreme Court

State v. Blankenship

1996 Ohio 58, 74 Ohio St. 3d 522

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedFebruary 14, 1996

Docket1995-1923

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 1996 Ohio 58 (State v. Blankenship) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Blankenship, 1996 Ohio 58, 74 Ohio St. 3d 522 (Ohio 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 74 Ohio St.3d 522.]

THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLEE, v. BLANKENSHIP, APPELLANT. [Cite as State v. Blankenship, 1996-Ohio-58.] Appellate procedure—Application for reopening appeal from judgment and conviction based on claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel— Application denied when no genuine issue whether applicant was deprived of effective assistance of appellate counsel is present. (No. 95-1923—Submitted November 14, 1995—Decided February 14, 1996.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Butler County, No. CA94-05-118. __________________ {¶ 1} Appellant, Darryl J. Blankenship, was convicted of three counts of having weapons while under disability in violation of R.C. 2923.13, with specifications under R.C. 2929.71. The court of appeals affirmed. State v. Blankenship (1995), 102 Ohio App.3d 534, 657 N.E.2d 559, appeal denied, 73 Ohio St.3d 1426, 652 N.E.2d 799. {¶ 2} In June 1995, appellant filed with the court of appeals an application to reopen his appeal under App.R. 26(B), alleging ineffective assistance of his appellate counsel. The court of appeals denied the application, finding “no genuine issue as to whether appellant was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel on appeal.” {¶ 3} Appellant appeals the denial to this court. __________________ John F. Holcomb, Butler County Prosecuting Attorney, and Richard A. Hyde, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. Darryl J. Blankenship, pro se. __________________ SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

Per Curiam. {¶ 4} We affirm the court of appeals for the reasons stated in its entry. Judgment affirmed. MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, WRIGHT, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER and COOK, JJ., concur. __________________

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 74 Ohio St.3d 522.]

THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLEE, v. BLANKENSHIP, APPELLANT. [Cite as State v. Blankenship, 1996-Ohio-58.] Appellate procedure—Application for reopening appeal from judgment and conviction based on claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel— Application denied when no genuine issue whether applicant was deprived of effective assistance of appellate counsel is present. (No. 95-1923—Submitted November 14, 1995—Decided February 14, 1996.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Butler County, No. CA94-05-118. __________________ {¶ 1} Appellant, Darryl J. Blankenship, was convicted of three counts of having weapons while under disability in violation of R.C. 2923.13, with specifications under R.C. 2929.71. The court of appeals affirmed. State v. Blankenship (1995), 102 Ohio App.3d 534, 657 N.E.2d 559, appeal denied, 73 Ohio St.3d 1426, 652 N.E.2d 799. {¶ 2} In June 1995, appellant filed with the court of appeals an application to reopen his appeal under App.R. 26(B), alleging ineffective assistance of his appellate counsel. The court of appeals denied the application, finding “no genuine issue as to whether appellant was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel on appeal.” {¶ 3} Appellant appeals the denial to this court. __________________ John F. Holcomb, Butler County Prosecuting Attorney, and Richard A. Hyde, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. Darryl J. Blankenship, pro se. __________________ SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

Per Curiam. {¶ 4} We affirm the court of appeals for the reasons stated in its entry. Judgment affirmed. MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, WRIGHT, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER and COOK, JJ., concur. __________________

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1996 Ohio 58, 74 Ohio St. 3d 522, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-blankenship-ohio-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack