Summary
In State v. Landrum, 87 Ohio St.3d 315, 1999-Ohio-71, 720 N.E.2d 524, (Landrum IV), the Supreme Court of Ohio agreed with this court's decision that Appellant's application to reopen his appeal was untimely under App.R. 26 (B) and that Appellant had failed to show "good cause" for the untimely filing.
Summary of this case from State v. LandrumOpinion
No. 99-994.
Submitted October 19, 1999.
Decided December 22, 1999.
Appeal from the Court of Appeals for Ross County, No. 86CA1330.
Scott W. Nusbaum, Ross County Prosecuting Attorney, and Michael L. Collyer, Special Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.
David H. Bodiker, Ohio Public Defender, and Pam Prude-Smithers, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.
Appellant, Lawrence A. Landrum, was convicted of the aggravated murder of Harold White, Sr. and sentenced to death. Landrum was also sentenced to prison for aggravated burglary. The court of appeals affirmed the convictions and sentence. State v. Landrum (Jan. 12, 1989), Ross App. No. 1330, unreported, 1989 WL 4244. On direct appeal as of right, we also affirmed. State v. Landrum (1990), 53 Ohio St.3d 107, 559 N.E.2d 710. In May 1991, we granted a stay of execution to enable Landrum to file a petition for postconviction relief, State v. Landrum (1991), 60 Ohio St.3d 706, 573 N.E.2d 668, but Landrum never filed a petition for postconviction relief until 1996.
In September 1998, Landrum first filed an App.R. 26(B) application to reopen his appeal in the court of appeals, asserting that he had received ineffective assistance of counsel in his original appeal that was decided in January 1989. In April 1999, the court of appeals rejected that application as untimely and noted that Landrum "was represented by several different attorneys during the seven years after representation by his trial and appellate counsel ended," but still offered "no good reason explaining why this lengthy period elapsed before he filed his App.R. 26(B) application."
Landrum now appeals the court of appeals' rejection of his App.R. 26(B) application to reopen his 1989 appeal.
We agree with the court of appeals that Landrum's application to reopen his appeal was untimely under App.R. 26(B) and that Landrum failed to show "good cause" for the untimely filing. See, also, State v. Fox (1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 514, 700 N.E.2d 1253; State v. Wickline (1996), 74 Ohio St.3d 369, 371, 658 N.E.2d 1052, 1053.
Accordingly, the judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.