Rule 11.06 - Application for Reopening(A) General An appellant in a death-penalty case involving an offense committed on or after January 1, 1995, may apply for reopening of the appeal from the judgment of conviction and sentence, based on a claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel in the Supreme Court. An application for reopening shall be filed within ninety days from the issuance of the mandate of the Supreme Court, unless the appellant shows good cause for filing at a later time.
(B) Requirements An application for reopening shall contain all of the following:
(1) The Supreme Court case number in which reopening is sought and the trial court case number or numbers from which the appeal was taken;(2) A showing of good cause for untimely filing if the application is filed more than ninety days after entry of the judgment of the Supreme Court;(3) One or more propositions of law or arguments in support of propositions of law that previously were not considered on the merits in the case or that were considered on an incomplete record because of the claimed ineffective representation of appellate counsel; (4) An affidavit stating the basis for the claim that appellate counsel's representation was ineffective with respect to the propositions of law or arguments raised pursuant to S.Ct.Prac.R. 11.06(B)(3) and the manner in which the claimed deficiency prejudicially affected the outcome of the appeal, which affidavit may include citations to applicable authorities and references to the record; (5) If the application is filed more than ninety days after the issuance of the mandate of the Supreme Court, any relevant parts of the record available to the applicant; (6) All supplemental affidavits upon which the applicant relies;(7) Specific citations to the record, as necessary to support the claims raised in the application.(C) Response to an application for reopening Within thirty days from the filing of the application, the attorney for the prosecution may file and serve affidavits, parts of the record, and a memorandum of law in response to the application. Any memorandum in response shall include specific citations to the record, as necessary to respond to the claims raised in the application.
(D) Page limitation An application for reopening and a response to an application for reopening shall not exceed fifteen pages, exclusive of affidavits and parts of the record.
(E) Grounds for granting application An application for reopening shall be granted if there is a genuine issue as to whether the applicant was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel on appeal.
(F) Notice and appointment of counsel If the Supreme Court grants the application, the Clerk of the Supreme Court shall serve notice on the clerk of the trial court, and the Supreme Court will do both of the following:
(1) Appoint counsel to represent the applicant if the applicant is indigent and not currently represented; (2) Impose conditions, if any, necessary to preserve the status quo during the pendency of the reopened appeal. (G) Procedure after granting an application(1) If the application is granted, the case shall proceed as on an initial appeal in accordance with these rules except that the Supreme Court may limit its review to those propositions of law and arguments not previously considered.(2) The time limits for preparation and transmission of the record pursuant to S.Ct.Prac.R. 11.04 shall run from entry of the order granting the application. The parties shall address in their briefs the claim that representation by prior appellate counsel was deficient and that the applicant was prejudiced by that deficiency. (H) Evidentiary hearing If the Supreme Court determines that an evidentiary hearing is necessary, the evidentiary hearing may be conducted by the Supreme Court or referred to a master commissioner.
(I) Supreme Court decision If the Supreme Court finds that the performance of appellate counsel was deficient and the applicant was prejudiced by that deficiency, the Supreme Court shall vacate its prior judgment and enter the appropriate judgment. If the Supreme Court does not so find, it shall issue an order confirming its prior judgment.
Ohio. R. Prac. S. Ct. 11.06
Amended: 4/1/1996; 4/1/2000; 7/1/2004; 1/1/2008; 1/1/2010; 1/1/2013; 1/1/2017.