State v. Woody

Full title: State of Ohio, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mike Woody, Defendant-Appellant

Court: Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, Cuyahoga County

Date published: Jul 13, 2010

2010 Ohio 3307 (Ohio Ct. App. 2010)

Opinion

No. 92929.

RELEASE DATE: July 13, 2010.

Application for Reopening, Motion No. 433325, Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court, Case No. CR-478107.

APPLICATION DENIED.

Robert A. Dixon, Thomas J. Escovar, Steuer, Escovar, Berk Brown Co., Attorneys for Appellant.

William D. Mason, Cuyahoga County Prosecutor, By: Mary McGrath, Assistant County Prosecutor, Attorneys for Appellee.

JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION

FRANK D. CELEBREZZE, JR., J.:

{¶ 1} Mike Woody has filed a timely application for reopening pursuant to App. R. 26(B). Woody is attempting to reopen the appellate judgment, as journalized in State v. Woody, Cuyahoga App. No. 92929, 2010-Ohio-72, which affirmed the denial of his motion to withdraw the plea of guilty as entered to the offenses of involuntary manslaughter and felonious assault in State v. Woody, Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case No. CR-478107. We decline to reopen Woody's appeal.

{¶ 2} The appeal, which forms the basis of Woody's application for reopening, concerned a post-conviction motion. Specifically, Woody's appeal involved an appeal from the denial of his motion to vacate the plea of guilty as entered to the offenses of involuntary manslaughter and felonious assault. An application for reopening, as brought pursuant to App. R. 26(B), can only be employed to reopen an appeal from the judgment of conviction and sentence, based upon a claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. See State v. Loomer, 76 Ohio St.3d 398, 1996-Ohio-59, 667 N.E.2d 1209. See, also, State v. Halliwell (Dec. 30, 1996), Cuyahoga App. No. 70369, reopening disallowed (Jan. 28, 1999), Motion No. 300187; State v. White (Jan. 7, 2002), Cuyahoga App. No. 78190, reopening disallowed (May 13, 2004), Motion No. 357536; State v. Shurney (Mar. 10, 1994), Cuyahoga App. No. 64670, reopening disallowed (May 15, 1995), Motion No. 260758. Since App. R. 26(B) applies only to the direct appeal of a criminal conviction, it cannot now be employed to challenge the appeal that dealt with the denial of Woody's motion to vacate guilty plea.

{¶ 3} Accordingly, the application for reopening is denied.

CHRISTINE T. McMONAGLE, P.J., and MELODY J. STEWART, J., CONCUR.