Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Powe

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Ninth District, Summit

December 26, 2019

STATE OF OHIO Appellee
v.
ORLANDO L. POWE Appellant

          APPEAL 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.

          SHERRI BEVAN WALSH, Prosecuting Attorney, and JACQUENETTE S. CORGAN, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for Appellee.

          DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY

          DONNA J. CARR JUDGE

         {¶1} Appellant, Orlando Powe, appeals the judgment of the Summit County Court of Common Pleas. This Court affirms.

         I.

         {¶2} 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.

         {¶3} 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, 2013).

         {¶4} 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.

         {¶5} 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.

         {¶6} 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.

         {¶7} On appeal, Powe raises one assignment of error.

         II.

         ASSIGNMENT ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.