State v. Taylor

Ohio Supreme Court

State v. Taylor

663 N.E.2d 926, 75 Ohio St. 3d 457

Ohio Supreme Court·Decided May 15, 1996·No. No. 95-2461·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals based on that court’s analysis of appellant’s claims. Appellant has failed to demonstrate “a [458]*458genuine issue as to whether the applicant was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel on appeal.” App.R. 26(B)(5).

Judgment affirmed.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Stratton, JJ., concur.

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

Per Curiam.

We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals based on that court’s analysis of appellant’s claims. Appellant has failed to demonstrate “a [458]*458genuine issue as to whether the applicant was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel on appeal.” App.R. 26(B)(5).

Judgment affirmed.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Stratton, JJ., concur.

State v. Taylor, 663 N.E.2d 926, 75 Ohio St. 3d 457 (Ohio 1996).

Pincite

663 N.E.2d 926 (State v. Taylor) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related