State v. Flugga
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as State v. Flugga , 2011-Ohio-3807.] COURT OF APPEALS LICKING COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT STATE OF OHIO Plaintiff-Appellee JUDGES: Hon. William B. Hoffman, P.J. Hon. Sheila G. Farmer, J. Hon. Patricia A. Delaney, J. -vsCase No. 11-CA-25 COREY FLUGGA Defendant-Appellant OPINION CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Appeal from the Licking County Court of Common Pleas, Case No. 08 CR 00448 JUDGMENT: Affirmed DATE OF JUDGMENT ENTRY: July 28, 2011 APPEARANCES: For Plaintiff-Appellee For Defendant-Appellant KENNETH W. OSWALT LICKING COUNTY PROSECUTOR COREY FLUGGA, PRO SE Institutional Number 596-828 P.O. Box 7010 Chillicothe, Ohio 45601 BY: DANIEL H. HUSTON Assistant Prosecutor 20 S. Second Street, Fourth Floor Newark, Ohio 43055 Licking County, Case No. 11-CA-25 2 Hoffman, P.J. {¶1} Defendant-appellant Corey Flugga appeals the February 14, 2011 Judgment Entry entered by the Licking County Court of Common Pleas which denied his Motion for De Novo Sentencing. The State of Ohio is plaintiff-appelle. STATEMENT OF THE CASE1 {¶2} Appellant was convicted of two counts of murder in 2009. Appellant appealed to this Court and we affirmed his convictions in State v. Flugga (October 19, 2009), Licking County Appeal No. 2009-CA-5, 2009-Ohio-5648. {¶3} On September 23, 2009, Appellant filed a petition for post-conviction relief. The trial court denied Appellant s petition. Appellant also appealed that decision to this Court and we affirmed the trial court s decision in State v. Flugga (September 7, 2010), Licking County App. No. 09-CA-140, 2010-Ohio-4237. {¶4} Thereafter, Appellant filed a Motion for De Novo Sentencing on October 20, 2010, arguing his sentence needed to be corrected to reflect his two convictions for murder should have been merged. The trial court denied his motion via Judgment Entry filed February 14, 2011. It is from that judgment entry Appellant prosecutes this appeal, assigning as error: {¶5} I. WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN DENYING THE APPELLANTS MOTION FOR DE NOVO SENTENCING BASED ON THAT IT LACKED JURISDICTION. {¶6} II. WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN DENYING THE APPELLANTS MOTION BASED ON RES JUDICATA. 1 A rendition of the facts is unnecessary for our resolution of this Appeal. Licking County, Case No. 11-CA-25 3 II {¶7} We address this assignment of error first as we find it dispositive of this Appeal pursuant to the two-issue rule. {¶8} We find the trial court correctly determined Appellant s claim for relief was barred by the doctrine of res judicata; not just once, but twice. Appellant could have raised this argument in his first direct appeal but did not. Furthermore, Appellant did raise this issue on appeal from denial of his prior post-conviction relief petition. This court specifically found the issue was barred by res judicata then and still is now. {¶9} Appellant s attempts to resurrect this issue by merely changing the title on the motion and asserting his original sentence is void. We find his argument without merit. The trial court correctly denied Appellant motion based upon the doctrine of res judicata. {¶10} Appellant s second assignment of error is overruled. I {¶11} Based upon our disposition of Appellant s second assignment of error, Appellant s first assignment of error is moot. Licking County, Case No. 11-CA-25 4 {¶12} The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. By: Hoffman, P.J. Farmer, J. and Delaney, J. concur s/ William B. Hoffman _________________ HON. WILLIAM B. HOFFMAN s/ Sheila G. Farmer __________________ HON. SHEILA G. FARMER s/ Patricia A. Delaney _________________ HON. PATRICIA A. DELANEY Licking County, Case No. 11-CA-25 5 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR LICKING COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT STATE OF OHIO Plaintiff-Appellee -vsCOREY FLUGGA Defendant-Appellant : : : : : : : : : JUDGMENT ENTRY Case No. 11-CA-25 For the reasons set forth in our accompanying Opinion, the judgment of the Licking County Court of Common Pleas is affirmed. Costs to Appellant. s/ William B. Hoffman _________________ HON. WILLIAM B. HOFFMAN s/ Sheila G. Farmer __________________ HON. SHEILA G. FARMER s/ Patricia A. Delaney _________________ HON. PATRICIA A. DELANEY
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
