State v. Liebtag

State: Ohio

Docket No: 1994-1473

Case Date: 12/14/1994

Plaintiff: State

Defendant: Liebtag

Preview:OPINIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO **** SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITING **** The full texts of the opinions of the Supreme Court of Ohio are being transmitted electronically beginning May 27, 1992, pursuant to a pilot project implemented by Chief Justice Thomas J. Moyer. Please call any errors to the attention of the Reporter's Office of the Supreme Court of Ohio. Attention: Walter S. Kobalka, Reporter, or Deborah J. Barrett, Administrative Assistant. Tel.: (614) 466-4961; in Ohio 1-800-826-9010. Your comments on this pilot project are also welcome. NOTE: Corrections may be made by the Supreme Court to the full texts of the opinions after they have been released electronically to the public. The reader is therefore advised to check the bound volumes of Ohio St.3d published by West Publishing Company for the final versions of these opinions. The advance sheets to Ohio St.3d will also contain the volume and page numbers where the opinions will be found in the bound volumes of the Ohio Official Reports. The State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Liebtag, Appellant. [Cite as State v. Liebtag (1994), Ohio St.3d .] Appellate procedure -- App.R. 26 -- Application for reopening appeal from judgment and conviction based on claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel -- Application denied when issue raised by appellant has previously been considered by appellate court. (No. 94-1473 Submitted October 24, 1994 -- Decided December 14, 1994.) Appeal from the Court of Appeals for Stark County, No. CA-9365. Appellant, Craig L. Liebtag, alleges he was convicted of involuntary manslaughter in 1988, after pleading guilty. In 1993, he was allowed to file a delayed appeal, but the court of appeals affirmed the conviction by judgment entry of February 7, 1994. Appellant subsequently applied to the court of appeals to reopen the appeal from the judgment of conviction, alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel involving his plea of guilty to involuntary manslaughter. The court of appeals denied the application, stating in its entry on reconsideration that the issue raised by appellant had previously been considered in its February 7, 1994 opinion. Appellant appeals the denial to this court. Craig L. Liebtag, pro se. Per Curiam. The decision of the court of appeals is affirmed for the reasons stated therein. Judgment affirmed. Moyer, C.J., A.W. Sweeney, Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur. Wright, J., dissents.

Download 1994-ohio-72.pdf