FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS COUNTY OF
SUMMIT, OHIO CASE No. CR-2001-06-1516
ORLANDO L. POWE, pro se, Appellant.
BEVAN WALSH, Prosecuting Attorney, and JACQUENETTE S. CORGAN,
Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for Appellee.
DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY
J. CARR JUDGE
Appellant, Orlando Powe, appeals the judgment of the Summit
County Court of Common Pleas. This Court affirms.
Following a jury trial in 2002, Powe was convicted of murder,
felonious assault, and endangering children. After finding
that the counts of murder and felonious assault merged for
sentencing purposes, the trial court imposed a prison term of
15 years to life for murder and a prison term of eight years
for child endangering. The trial court ordered that the
sentences were to run consecutively for a total prison
sentence of 23 years to life. This Court affirmed Powe's
convictions on direct appeal. See State v. Powe, 9th
Dist. Summit No. 21026, 2002-Ohio-6034, ¶ 1.
Powe has attempted to challenge his convictions on a number
of occasions in recent years. In 2012, Powe unsuccessfully
moved to merge his sentences on the basis that he had been
sentenced on allied offenses of similar import. This Court
dismissed Powe's appeal from that judgment entry due to
the fact that he failed to file an appellate brief. See
State v. Powe, 9th Dist. Summit No. 26716 (Aug. 13,
In 2013, Powe filed a motion to vacate his sentence, arguing
that he had been sentenced on allied offenses. The trial
court denied the motion. This Court upheld the trial
court's judgment on the basis that Powe's motion
constituted an untimely and successive petition for
post-conviction relief. See State v. Powe, 9th Dist.
Summit No. 27163, 2014-Ohio-478, ¶ 11.
In 2017, Powe filed another motion to vacate judgment,
arguing that the trial court lacked subject matter
jurisdiction over the case and that his due process rights
had been violated. In support of his motion, Powe argued that
while an indictment had been filed in his case, no criminal
complaint had been filed. The trial court denied this motion
as well. On appeal, this Court again concluded that
Powe's motion constituted an untimely and successive
petition for post-conviction relief. State v. Powe,
9th Dist. Summit No. 28729, 2018-Ohio-477, ¶ 15.
On January 2, 2019, Owe filed a pro se motion for leave to
file a motion for new trial. The State filed a memorandum in
opposition to the motion. The trial court denied the motion
in a journal entry issued on April 22, 2019.
On appeal, Powe raises one assignment of error.