State v. Smith

Summary

The Seventh District Court of Appeals of Ohio denied Sammie Smith, Jr.’s application for reconsideration under Ohio Appellate Rule 26(A). The court held that the application was untimely, that Smith had not established extraordinary circumstances, and that he had not identified an obvious error or overlooked issue in the court’s prior decision affirming dismissal of his untimely post-conviction petition. The prior petition concerned alleged Brady violations and access to a laboratory standard operating procedure file.

Holdings

1. A delayed application for reconsideration under App.R. 26(A) may proceed only when the moving party establishes extraordinary circumstances excusing the untimely filing; Smith failed to establish extraordinary circumstances for filing four days late.
2. Reconsideration is not warranted merely because a party disagrees with the appellate court's reasoning or conclusions; the applicant must identify an obvious error or an issue that was not adequately considered, and Smith made no such showing.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Smith's delayed application for reconsideration should be accepted because extraordinary circumstances excused his failure to comply with App.R. 26(A)(1)(a)'s ten-day filing deadline.
2. Whether Smith demonstrated an obvious error, an overlooked issue, or an unsupportable legal decision warranting reconsideration under App.R. 26(A).

Disposition

other