State v. Simpson

2015 Ohio 3491

• Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
• Decided: August 27, 2015
• Docket: 15AP-188
• Status: Published

Opinion

[Cite as State v. Simpson, 2015-Ohio-3491.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO

TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

State of Ohio, :

Plaintiff-Appellee, :

v. : No. 15AP-188 (C.P.C. No. 00CR-5064) Donovan E. Simpson, : (ACCELERATED CALENDAR) Defendant-Appellant. :

D E C I S I O N

Rendered on August 27, 2015

Ron O'Brien, Prosecuting Attorney, and Steven L. Taylor, for appellee.

Donovan E. Simpson, pro se.

APPEAL from the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas

TYACK, J.

{¶ 1} Donovan E. Simpson is appealing from the trial court's overruling of his "motion to reverse conviction." Since the trial court acted correctly, we affirm. {¶ 2} Simpson alleges three errors in his briefs: [I.] The prosecution violated Brady v. Maryland when they failed to disclose exculpatory evidence in its possession.

[II.] Trial counsel was ineffective for failing to present a defense, failing to request funds for a fire expert, failing to object when the states fire investigator admit[ed] that they had lost the physical evidence.

[III.] The trial court abused its discretion when it admitted perjured testimony from the states witness. No. 15AP-188 2

{¶ 3} Simpson was convicted of numerous charges in 2001, including aggravated murder and attempted murder. Following an appeal, he was resentenced in 2003. State v. Simpson, 10th Dist. No. 01AP-757, 2002-Ohio-3717. In the ten plus years intervening, he has filed numerous motions and petitions for post-conviction relief. His most recent motion titled "motion to review convictions" can only be deemed a petition for post- conviction relief. {¶ 4} The Ohio legislature has limited the time during which inmates can file petitions for post-conviction relief. See R.C. 2953.21. {¶ 5} The time the legislature has allowed for such petition and for motions which must be deemed as such petitions, has long since passed for Donovan Simpson. His latest action is a time-barred and a successive post-conviction petition. The trial court was correct to deny Simpson relief. {¶ 6} The assignments of error are overruled. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Judgment affirmed.

KLATT and HORTON, JJ., concur.