[Cite as State v. Bronczyk, 2013-Ohio-3129.]
Court of Appeals of Ohio
EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION
No. 98664
STATE OF OHIO
PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE
vs.
JOSEPH BRONCZYK
DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
JUDGMENT:
APPLICATION DENIED
Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court
Case No. CR-540345
Application for Reopening
Motion No. 465969
RELEASE DATE: July 17, 2013
APPELLANT
Joseph Bronczyk, Pro Se
No. 594-815
2500 South Avon Belden Road
Grafton, Ohio 44044
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Timothy J. McGinty
Cuyahoga County Prosecutor
By: Holly Welsh
Assistant County Prosecutor
1200 Ontario Street
Cleveland, Ohio 44113
KATHLEEN ANN KEOUGH, J.:
{¶1} On June 20, 2013, Joseph Bronczyk filed an application for reopening
pursuant to App.R. 26(B). Bronczyk is attempting to reopen the appeal that was
dismissed by this court on May 8, 2013.
App.R. 26(B)(1) provides that
a defendant in a criminal case may apply for reopening of the appeal
from the judgment of conviction and sentence, based on a claim of
ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. An application for reopening
shall be filed in the court of appeals where the appeal was decided within
ninety days from journalization of the appellate judgment unless the
applicant shows good cause for filing at a later time.
(Emphasis added.)
{¶2} In the case sub judice, no appellate judgment was announced and journalized
by this court that reviewed Bronczyk’s conviction and sentence as rendered in State v.
Bronczyk, Cuyahoga C.P. No. CR-540345. Thus, this court is prevented from
considering Bronczyk’s application for reopening as made pursuant to App.R. 26(B).
State v. Loomer, 76 Ohio St.3d 398, 1996-Ohio-59, 667 N.E.2d 1209; See also State v.
Halliwell, 8th Dist. No. 70369, 1999 Ohio App. LEXIS 285 (Jan. 28, 1999).
Accordingly, the application for reopening is denied.
KATHLEEN ANN KEOUGH, JUDGE
FRANK D. CELEBREZZE, JR., P.J., and
MARY EILEEN KILBANE, J., CONCUR