Can the State Court deprive the Appellant the fundamental right to effective assistance of Appellate Counsel by denying an Appellant/Defendant the opportunity to timely amend a timely filed Ohio Appellate Rule 26(B), Application For Re-Opening the appeal base on ineffective assistance of counsel, thereby, denying Appellant/Defendant his constitutional right under the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution to effective assistance of appellate counsel by not allowing the Appellant opportunity to present his ineffective assistance of counsel argument in its entirety?

I. Whether Appellate Counsel was ineffective for failing to Argue that Canons of Strict Construction and Due Process Require the conclusion that the Unit of prosecution for O.R.C.§ 2909.02(A)(1) is each fire or explosion knowingly set which results in the required harm?

II.

Can the State Court deprive the Appellant the fundamental right to effective assistance of Appellate Counsel?