FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS COUNTY OF
LORAIN, OHIO CASE No. 11CR082579
DONZELLE CROSBY, Appellant, pro se.
P. WILL, Prosecuting Attorney, and NATASHA RUIZ GUERRIERI,
Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for Appellee.
Appellant, Donzelle Crosby, appeals from the judgment of the
Lorain County Court of Common Pleas which denied his petition
for post-conviction relief. This Court affirms.
The facts and initial procedural history of this case were
set out in Mr. Crosby's direct appeal. See State v.
Crosby, 9th Dist. Lorain No. 15CA010724, 2015-Ohio-5176,
¶ 2-3. Mr. Crosby appealed from his convictions arguing
that his convictions were based on insufficient evidence and
against the manifest weight of the evidence because of
contradictions in the testimony of the witnesses, because his
trial counsel were ineffective for failing to object to
Bruton evidence, hearsay evidence, and witness
bolstering, and because the court erred in not ordering a new
competency evaluation. Id. at ¶ 4, 7, 13,
21-23, 25. This Court overruled Mr. Crosby's assignments
of error and affirmed his convictions. Id. at ¶
On March 16, 2016, Mr. Crosby filed a petition in the trial
court to vacate or set aside his convictions, in which he
argued that attorney Jack Bradley was ineffective when he
terminated his representation of Mr. Crosby to represent a
co-defendant, who ultimately testified against Mr. Crosby. He
also argued that his trial counsel were ineffective in not
raising Mr. Bradley's alleged conflict, the State of Ohio
denied him due process (or alternatively committed
prosecutorial misconduct) when it entered into a plea bargain
with the co-defendant and allowed him to testify, and the
trial court denied him the right to effective assistance of
counsel when it failed to order a hearing on the
"sufficiently apparent" conflict.
The trial court denied Mr. Crosby's petition in a one
paragraph journal entry dated August 23, 2016. Mr. Crosby
filed a notice of appeal from this entry, and he now presents
the four identical issues raised in his post-conviction
petition as assignments of error for this Court's review.
The assignments of error have been consolidated to facilitate
this Court's discussion.
OF ERROR I
JACK BRADLEY COMMITTED INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL WHEN
HE TERMINATED REPRESENTATION WITH [MR. CROSBY], A CURRENT
CLIENT, TO REPRESENT JEREMY BROWN, A CO-DEFENDANT (NEVER
REPRESENTED BY ATTORNEY BRADLEY) IN THIS AGGRAVATED MURDER
PROSECUTION. JEREMY BROWN WAS ONE OF THE PRIMARY EVIDENTIARY
WITNESSES AGAINST [MR. CROSBY].
OF ERROR II
COUNSEL WAS INEFFECTIVE WHEN IT FAILED TO RAISE THE ISSUE OF
A CONFLICT OF INTEREST WHEN FACED WITH JEREMY ...