State v. Hernandez-Reynoso, Unpublished Decision (11-18-2005)

Ohio Court of Appeals

State v. Hernandez-Reynoso, Unpublished Decision (11-18-2005)

2005 Ohio 6157

CourtOhio Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 18, 2005

DocketNo. 2005-L-149.

StatusUnpublished

This text of 2005 Ohio 6157 (State v. Hernandez-Reynoso, Unpublished Decision (11-18-2005)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law.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.

Bluebook

State v. Hernandez-Reynoso, Unpublished Decision (11-18-2005), 2005 Ohio 6157 (Ohio Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION {¶ 1} On September 13, 2005, appellant, Santiago A. Hernandez-Reynoso, filed a motion for leave to file a delayed appeal in this criminal matter. However, appellant failed to simultaneously file a notice of appeal as is required by App.R. 5(A).

{¶ 2} The provisions of App.R. 5(A) are mandatory and jurisdictional.State v. Fisher (1975), 46 Ohio App.2d 279, 280. Accordingly, this court has no choice but to overrule appellant's motion for leave to file a delayed appeal.

{¶ 3} We note that appellant is not precluded form filing another motion for leave to file a delayed appeal in addition to a proper notice of appeal that complies with all applicable appellate rules.

{¶ 4} Appeal dismissed.

Rice, J., O'Toole, J., concur.

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