will issue for the remaining claims discussed above. b. claim first raised in first post-conviction proceeding The petitioner first raised claim 17(a) (ineffective assistance of trial counsel for failure to adequately investigate guilt issues) in his first petition for post-conviction relief. On appeal from the post-conviction court’s dismissal of that claim, the Eleventh District Court of Appeals found that much of the evidence that the petitioner used to support this claim was contained in the record. State v. Davie, No. 97-T-0175, 1998 WL 684157, at *3 (Ohio Ct.App. Sept. 25, 1998). The court held that the petitioner’s reliance on those materials rendered any portion of the claim relying on it barred by res judicata, citing State v. Perry, 10 Ohio St.2d 175, 226 N.E.2d 104 (1967) (<HOLDING>). The Sixth Circuit has held that the Perry
holding that issues that were raised and decided on direct appeal are barred by res judicata from further consideration on petition for postconviction relief holding that the doctrine of res judicata is applicable to defenses that could have been raised in a prior action holding that the claim of not being able to interview jurors was procedurally barred because the claim should and could have been raised on direct appeal holding that any claim that was raised or could have been raised on direct appeal is barred from review on post conviction under the doctrine of res judicata holding that the caldwell claim is procedurally barred because it could have been raised on direct appeal but was not