Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, Cuyahoga
Appeal from the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case
Michael C. O'Malley Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney,
Jennifer Meyer and Mary M. Frey, Assistant Prosecuting
Attorneys, for appellee.
Shabazz Abdul, pro se.
JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION
PATRICIA ANN BLACKMON, JUDGE
1} This cause came to be heard upon the accelerated
calendar pursuant to App.R. 11.1 and Loc.R. 11.1.
Defendant-appellant, Jamill Shabazz Abdul, a.k.a. Jamil A
Shabazz and Jamill Abdul ("Shabazz Abdul"), appeals
from trial court's judgment denying his petition for
postconviction relief. He assigns the following error for our
I. The trial court violated Crim.R. 43(A) (1) of [Shabazz
II. The trial court violated the substantial rights of
[Shabazz Abdul], according to Crim.R. 33(C).
III. The trial court abused its discretion and violated the
due process rights of [Shabazz Abdul].
2} Having reviewed the record and the pertinent law,
we affirm the decision of the trial court.
3} In 2007, Shabazz Abdul was convicted of murder
with a firearm specification, notice of prior conviction, and
repeat violent offender specification in connection with the
shooting death of Gregory Rogers. Shabazz Abdul was sentenced
to 15 years to life, plus 3 years for the weapon.
4} On direct appeal, Shabazz Abdul argued that the
conviction was not supported by sufficient evidence, and that
he did not receive effective assistance of counsel. This
court affirmed. State v. [Shabazz] Abdul, 8th Dist.
Cuyahoga No. 90789, 2009-Ohio-225 ("Shabazz Abdul
5} Later in 2009, Shabazz Abdul filed a petition for
postconviction relief in the trial court, claiming that a
state's witness committed perjury, and that he was denied
effective assistance of counsel. The trial court denied the
petition, and this court affirmed its decision. State v.
Shabazz [Abdul], 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 94738,
2010-Ohio-5789 ("Shabazz Abdul II
6} On May 17, 2012, Shabazz Abdul filed his first
motion for a new trial, challenging his indictment, the
amendment of his indictment, and the court's jury
instructions. The motion for a new trial was denied, and this
court affirmed its decision. State v. Shabazz