Does Failure to Raise Ineffective Counsel Issue in Supreme Court Appeal Bar Later ‘Murnahan’ Claim?
State of Ohio v. Andre Davis, Case no. 2007-0325 1st District Court of Appeals (Hamilton County) ISSUE: Under Ohio Appellate Rule 26(B), a defendant who has been convicted and sentenced for a criminal offense and whose direct appeal of that conviction has been denied by a court of appeals is permitted to apply for reopening of his appellate case based on a claim that he received ineffective assistance by the attorneys who represented him in his initial appeal. Because a defendant’s right to apply for this type of relief was set forth in the Supreme Court of Ohio’s decision in State v. Murnahan (1992), applications for reopening of an appeal under App .R. 26(B) are widely referred to as “Murnahan” cases. In this case, the Supreme Court is asked to determine whether a court of appeals acted properly in summarily dismissing a Murnahan claim asserted by a felony offender on the ground that, before filing his Murnahan action, the defendant had appealed the denial of his initial appeal to th
Related Questions
- Does the Supreme Court have to accept any normal appeal brought by Microsoft or the Justice Department and states?
- Can California Supreme Court documents be filed with the Fourth District Court of Appeal, Division One?
- Does Failure to Raise Ineffective Counsel Issue in Supreme Court Appeal Bar Later ‘Murnahan’ Claim?
