State v. Leslein

2025 Ohio 2186

• Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
• Decided: June 23, 2025
• Docket: 2025-L-050
• Status: Published

Opinion

[Cite as State v. Leslein, 2025-Ohio-2186.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT LAKE COUNTY

STATE OF OHIO, CASE NO. 2025-L-050

Plaintiff-Appellee, Civil Appeal from the - vs - Court of Common Pleas

NICOLE M. LESLEIN, Trial Court No. 2021 CR 000572 Defendant-Appellant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT ENTRY

Decided: June 23, 2025 Judgment: Appeal dismissed

Charles E. Coulson, Lake County Prosecutor, Lake County Administration Building, 105 Main Street, P.O. Box 490, Painesville, OH 44077 (For Plaintiff-Appellee).

Nicole M. Leslein, pro se, PID# W107-880, Ohio Reformatory for Women, 1479 Collins Avenue, Marysville, OH 43040 (Defendant-Appellant).

JOHN J. EKLUND, J.

{¶1} On May 6, 2025, appellant, Nicole M. Leslein, filed a pro se notice of appeal

from the trial court’s March 26, 2025 entry, denying appellant’s motion for clarification.

{¶2} App.R. 3(A) expressly states that the only jurisdictional requirement for filing

a valid appeal is to file it within the time allowed by App.R. 4. “[A] party who wishes to

appeal from an order that is final upon its entry shall file the notice of appeal required by

App.R. 3 within 30 days of that entry.” App.R. 4(A)(1).

{¶3} The Supreme Court has held that the failure to comply with the time

requirements of App.R. 4(A) is a jurisdictional defect, which is fatal to an appeal. In re H.F., 2008-Ohio-6810, ¶ 17, citing State ex rel. Pendell v. Adams Cty. Bd. of Elections,

40 Ohio St.3d 58, 60 (1988).

{¶4} Here, a timely appeal from the March 26, 2025 entry was due no later than

April 25, 2025, which was not a holiday or weekend. Thus, the appeal was untimely filed

by eleven days.

{¶5} Appellant has not complied with the thirty-day rule set forth in App.R.

4(A)(1). Therefore, this court is without jurisdiction to consider this appeal.

{¶6} This appeal is hereby dismissed, sua sponte, as untimely.

EUGENE A. LUCCI, J.,

SCOTT LYNCH, J.,

concur.

PAGE 2 OF 3

Case No. 2025-L-050 JUDGMENT ENTRY

For the reasons stated in the memorandum opinion of this court, this appeal is

hereby dismissed, sua sponte, as untimely.

Costs shall be taxed against appellant.

JUDGE JOHN J. EKLUND

JUDGE EUGENE A. LUCCI, concurs

JUDGE SCOTT LYNCH, concurs

THIS DOCUMENT CONSTITUTES A FINAL JUDGMENT ENTRY

A certified copy of this opinion and judgment entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the Ohio Rules of Appellate Procedure.

PAGE 3 OF 3

Case No. 2025-L-050