State v. Kinney
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
OPINIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 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. Kinney, Appellant. [Cite as State v. Kinney (1995), Ohio St.3d .] Appellate procedure -- Application for reopening appeal from judgment and conviction based on claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel -- Application denied when applicant fails to establish good cause for failing to file his application within ninety days after journalization of the appellate judgment as required by App.R. 26(B)(2)(b). (No. 95-523 -- Submitted May 23, 1995 -- Decided August 9, 1995.) Appeal from the Court of Appeals for Hamilton County, No. C-73373. Appellant, Jack Kinney, was convicted of murder in the first degree and the crimes of shooting to kill and to wound. The court of appeals affirmed the convictions and sentences. State v. Kinney (May 20, 1974), Hamilton App. No. C-73373, unreported. On November 17, 1994, Kinney filed with the court of appeals an application to reopen his appeal under App. R. 26(B), alleging ineffective assistance of his appellate counsel. The court of appeals denied the application due to Kinney's failure to show good cause for filing his application more than ninety days after the court's judgment was journalized, as required by App. R. 26(B)(2)(b). Appellant appeals the denial to this court. Joseph T. Deters, Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney, and Phillip R. Cummings, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. Jack Kinney, pro se. Per Curiam. We affirm the decision of the court of appeals for the reasons stated in its opinion. Judgment affirmed. Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Wright, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Cook, JJ., concur.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
