State v. Lanham

656 N.E.2d 948, 74 Ohio St. 3d 1453, 1995 Ohio LEXIS 2394
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided November 13, 1995·No. 95-2270·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Medina County, No. 2295-M. Appellant has filed an untimely appeal of the court of appeals’ decision denying his application for delayed reopening under App.R. 26(B) and a motion for delayed appeal. This appeal involves a civil, post-conviction matter and not an appeal of a felony case to which the provisions for delayed appeal in S.Ct.Prac.R. II(2)(A)(4) apply. Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED by the court, sua sponte, effective November 8,1995, that the motion for delayed appeal be, and hereby is, stricken.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court, sua sponte, that, in that appellant failed to perfect an appeal pursuant to S.Ct.Prac.R. II(2)(A)(1), this cause be, and hereby is, dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

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

State v. Lanham, 656 N.E.2d 948, 74 Ohio St. 3d 1453, 1995 Ohio LEXIS 2394 (Ohio 1995).

656 N.E.2d 948 (State v. Lanham) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Fernando Lopez v. Julius Wilson, Warden
426 F.3d 339 (Sixth Circuit, 2005)
Lopez v. Wilson
Sixth Circuit, 2005