Death Sentence Reversed for Lack of Jurisdiction
The Ohio Supreme Court today in State v. Yarbrough was forced to reverse a death sentence for lack of jurisdiction. Their decision reversed a death sentence imposed in the murders of two Ohio college students because of the prosecutor's failure to distinguish between the venue statute and the jurisdiction statute in drafting the indictment. The homicides occurred in Pennsylvania, yet the state and defense proceeded under the assumption that Ohio had subject matter jursdiction to try the defendant for aggravated homicide.
This error remained unnoticed up until the appeal process; as the Ohio Supreme Court noted, "Nothing in the record reflects that the defense counsel or the trial court ever recognized this error - despite the fact that the prosecutor was seeking the death penalty. It was not until our review of the record and our request for supplemental briefing that the issue of the jurisdiction of the trial court over the aggravated-murder charges was addressed."
The Ohio Supreme Court did not have to order the release the defendant; Yarbrough was convicted of other crimes for which jurisdiction did lie in Ohio. The Court affirmed multiple other convictions, including convictions for robbery, burglary, and kidnapping, and a total prison sentence of 59 years for those crimes. Moreover, the Court noted that Yarbrough may yet be tried in an appropriate court for crimes relating to the deaths of the men he victimized.
The Court's opinion can be accessed here.
Written By:jackson On December 1, 2004 5:46 PM Written By:Vanessa On December 1, 2004 6:12 PM
Jackson, my apologies for the lack of clarity in the first post--I have added a few more sentences that speak to the the very crux of the issue.
Is the death sentence, constitutional?
I'm not sure this writeup does justice to the utter absurdity of this case. The reason the case was dismissed is because the crime was not committed in Ohio, it was committed in Pennsylvania.