text: [Cite as State v. Blakeley, 2012-Ohio-5531.]
  
  
  
  
                              IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO
                                 SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
                                       MIAMI COUNTY
  
  STATE OF OHIO                                      :
                                                     :     Appellate Case No. 2012-CA-4
          Plaintiff-Appellee                         :
                                                     :     Trial Court Case No. 11-CRB-3437
  v.                                                 :
                                                     :
  ELI J. BLAKELEY                                    :     (Criminal Appeal from
                                                     :     (Miami County Municipal Court)
          Defendant-Appellant                        :
                                                     :
                                                  ...........
  
                                                 OPINION
  
                              Rendered on the 30th day of November, 2012.
  
                                                  ...........
  
  ANDREW H. JOHNSTON, Miami County Municipal Prosecutor’s Office, 201 West Main
  Street, Troy, Ohio 45373
          Attorney for Plaintiff-Appellee
  
  ELI J. BLAKELEY, 269 Mill Place, New Lebanon, Ohio 45345
          Defendant-Appellant, pro se
  
                                                 .............
  
  FAIN, J.
  
          {¶ 1}     Defendant-appellant Eli Blakely appeals from his conviction for Public
  
  Indecency and the imposition of a $50 fine, along with court costs. Blakely contends that his
                                                                                               2
  
  
  trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to present evidence and ask questions of
  
  witnesses at trial that Blakely believes would have proven his innocence. We conclude that
  
  Blakely has failed to show that he was prejudiced by any alleged errors of his trial counsel.
  
  Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is Affirmed.
  
  
  
                   I. An Eyewitness Sees Blakely Expose His Private Parts
  
         {¶ 2}    In October 2011, a woman driving on State Route 718 saw Eli Blakely on the
  
  side of the road near the back bumper of his car. According to the woman, Blakely was nude
  
  and appeared to be squatting as if he was defecating. The eyewitness obtained Blakely’s
  
  license plate number and called the sheriff’s department. A sheriff’s deputy questioned
  
  Blakely later that day. Blakely admitted that he was outside his car at the location described
  
  by the eyewitness, but he denied being nude when the eyewitness passed by in her car. When
  
  questioned about brown residue on his car’s bumper, Blakely stated that the brown residue
  
  was horse manure, not human fecal matter.
  
         {¶ 3}    Blakely was charged with Public Indecency, a fourth-degree misdemeanor, in
  
  violation of R.C. 2907.09(A)(1). At the trial, Blakely testified on his own behalf and the
  
  eyewitness and a sheriff’s deputy testified for the State. Blakely was found guilty of Public
  
  Indecency and was ordered to pay a $50 fine and court costs. From this judgment, Blakely
  
  appeals.
  
  
  
                 II. Blakely Failed To Demonstrate That He Was Prejudiced
  
                             By His Trial Counsel’s Alleged Errors
  [Cite as State v. Blakeley, 2012-Ohio-5531.]
          {¶ 4}     Blakely has filed a one-page “Brief to appeal conviction.” This appellate
  
  brief does not comply with App.R. 16(A) in several respects. For example, Blakely failed to
  
  include a statement of facts, statement of the case, statement of the assignments of error,
  
  statement of the issues presented for review, or citations to the record on which he relies.
  
  App.R. 16(A)(3)-(6).
  
          {¶ 5}     Blakely essentially complains that his trial counsel failed to present certain
  
  evidence at his trial, including the audiovisual recording from the sheriff deputy’s cruiser, and
  
  failed to ask questions that Blakely wanted his counsel to ask the witnesses at trial. We
  
  construe Blakely’s one-page brief as raising a claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel.
  
          {¶ 6}     A claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel requires both a showing that
  
  trial counsel’s representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, and that the
  
  defendant was prejudiced as a result. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct.
  
  2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). A reviewing court “must indulge in a strong presumption that
  
  counsel’s conduct falls within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance.” Id. at
  
  689. The prejudice prong requires a finding that there is a reasonable probability that, but for
  
  counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different, with a
  
  reasonable probability being “a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the
  
  outcome.” Id. at 694. See also State v. Bradley, 42 Ohio St.3d 136, 538 N.E.2d 373 (1989).
  
          {¶ 7}     Blakely contends that “[g]iven the evidence currently in my position [sic] and
  
  the video and audio evidence if they still exists [sic], I believe that I can prove beyond
  
  reasonable doubt that my accuser was mistaken about my actions that day[.]” Blakely states
  
  that this audio and video evidence would allow him to dispute inconsistencies in the incident
  
  report. But Blakely does not identify what those inconsistencies are or how the audio and
                                                                                                4
  
  
  video evidence would help prove these inconsistencies.
  
         {¶ 8}    Blakely also contends that “Once in the court room I had brought with me
  
  photos of where the incident had taken place, paperwork about my injuries that would have
  
  case [sic] serious doubt on my alleged actions and a list of questions I wanted asked of my
  
  accuser none of which [my trial counsel] used.” Once again, Blakely does not explain what is
  
  contained in the photos or what questions he wanted his trial counsel to ask the witnesses at
  
  trial. In short, Blakely has failed to show how, but for his trial counsel’s alleged errors, there
  
  is a reasonable probability that the result of the proceeding would have been different.
  
  Consequently, Blakely cannot establish the prejudice required for a successful claim of
  
  ineffective assistance of counsel.
  
         {¶ 9}    Blakely’s inferred assignment of error is overruled.
  
  
  
                                         III. Conclusion
  
         {¶ 10} Blakely’s assignment of error having been overruled, the judgment of the trial
  
  court is Affirmed.
  
                                          .............
  
  DONOVAN and FROELICH, JJ., concur.
  
  Copies mailed to:
  
  Andrew H. Johnston
  Eli J. Blakeley
  Hon. Mel Kemmer
  