Ohio. App. R. 5
Proposed Staff Notes (July 1, 2019 Amendment)
The amendment to App.R. 5(C) regarding the prosecution's motion for leave to appeal an order that was not final when it was made, but subsequently merged into a final order, is intended to address only the required timing of such a motion. The amendment does not affect the threshold determination of whether an order is, in fact, a final order, which is determined with reference to the relevant Ohio statutes.
The additional amendments to App.R. 5(C) and 5(D)(1) remove references to a "judgment or order" and a "judgment and order," instead referring solely to an "order." These amendments bring the rules into conformity with the language of App.R. 4(A), which was similarly amended in 2014. As noted in the July 1, 2014 Staff Note to App.R. 4, these changes are not substantive.
Staff Note (July 1, 2003 Amendment)
Rule 5 Appeals by Leave of Court
The title of this rule was changed from Appeals by Leave of Court in Criminal Cases to Appeals by Leave of Court as a consequence of the amendment to division (A) described below.
Rule 5(A) Motion by defendant for delayed appeal.
The amendment to division (A) effective July 1, 2003, was in response to the Supreme Court's decision in In re Anderson (2001), 92 Ohio St. 3d 63, which held that adjudications of delinquency are not judgments to which App. R. 5(A) applies. The amendment made App. R. 5(A) apply to delinquency and serious youthful offender proceedings.
Rule 5(B) Motion to reopen appellate proceedings.
The addition of a new division (B) was to address state appellate proceedings following a federal court's granting of a conditional writ of habeas corpus that allows the prisoner to be freed if the state appellate court does not reopen appellate proceedings to address constitutional issues in the case. As a result of the addition of this new division (B), divisions (B) - (E) of the previous rule were relettered (C) - (F) respectively.