State v. Jackson (Slip Opinion)
149 Ohio St. 3d 55
| Ohio | 2016Background
- Nathaniel Jackson and Donna Roberts planned and executed the December 11, 2001 murder of Robert Fingerhut; evidence included recorded letters/phone calls, gunshot forensics, blood and DNA, and theft of the victim’s car.
- Jackson was convicted of aggravated murder with two felony-murder specifications and sentenced to death; this Court affirmed in 2006.
- After this Court vacated Roberts’s death sentence for improper judge–prosecutor collaboration in drafting the sentencing opinion, the Eleventh District held the same drafting practice occurred in Jackson’s case and remanded for resentencing.
- On remand Judge Stuard resentenced Jackson to death in 2012, but his R.C. 2929.03(F) sentencing opinion did not expressly reference Jackson’s allocution and was similar to the original opinion.
- Jackson raised multiple challenges on appeal (judicial bias, defective sentencing opinion/finality, exclusion of new mitigating evidence on limited remand, failure to consider allocution, prosecutorial taint, counsel appointment/conflict, ineffective assistance, merger, method-of-execution, proportionality).
- The Ohio Supreme Court affirmed the resentencing: it found the allocution omission was error but harmless (to be cured by independent review), rejected claims of bias, found no entitlement to present new mitigation on a limited remand, and independently weighed aggravating and mitigating factors to uphold death.
Issues
| Issue | Jackson's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Trial judge impartiality on resentencing | Judge Stuard was biased (prior ex parte/prosecutor drafting; failed to cure) | Chief Justice previously denied disqualification; no evidence of actual bias | No actual bias shown; claim rejected (res judicata on some points) |
| Final, appealable order / compliance with R.C. 2929.03(F) | Sentencing opinion defective so order not final; court lacks jurisdiction | Sentencing opinion + judgment entries satisfy Crim.R. 32(C); sentencing errors non-jurisdictional | Court has jurisdiction; appeal proceeds |
| Exclusion of new mitigating evidence on limited remand | Eighth Amendment entitles Jackson to present newly developed mitigation (relying on Coyle) | Remand was limited; defendant had full opportunity earlier; Coyle not binding on Ohio Supreme Court | No constitutional right to update mitigation on a limited resentencing when original mitigation opportunity was full; claim denied |
| Failure to discuss allocution in sentencing opinion | Omission proves court did not consider allocution; requires reversal | Court stated it considered unsworn statement and allocution; omission may be harmless | Omission was error, but harmless beyond a reasonable doubt given extensive prior mitigation; remedied by independent appellate weighing |
| Alleged prosecutorial taint of 2012 opinion | Substantial textual similarity to 2002 opinion shows continued prosecutor influence; remand inadequate | Judge acknowledged duty to reweigh; prosecutor not involved in 2012; similarity explained by same record | No proof of continuing prosecutorial taint; no new remand required |
| Appointment / conflict of counsel at resentencing | Jackson lacked two appointed capital-certified attorneys; potential conflict with counsel who had federal role | Same experienced counsel had long represented Jackson; presence and performance negate prejudice | Trial court erred in not formally appointing two counsel, but no prejudice shown; ineffective-assistance claim rejected |
| Ineffective assistance based on 2002 co-counsel substitution | Substitute co-counsel was unprepared and prejudiced mitigation presentation | Claims were or could have been raised earlier; invited error and res judicata; record shows consent | Claims barred by res judicata/invited error; rejected |
| Merger of offenses/aggravators | Aggravated-burglary and aggravated-robbery (and underlying felonies) should merge | Offenses dissimilar in import, separate animus and harm; felony-murder not allied to underlying felonies | Merger claim rejected |
| Method of execution (lethal injection) | Execution protocol creates substantial risk of pain; statutes/policies noncompliant | Claim forfeited; would require evidence outside record | Waived/forfeited; no plain error on direct appeal; claim rejected |
| Reliability / proportionality of death sentence | Cumulative procedural defects render sentence unreliable | No prejudicial procedural error; aggravators proven; independent reweighing supports death | Independent review: aggravators outweigh mitigation beyond reasonable doubt; death sentence affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Jackson, 107 Ohio St.3d 300 (Ohio 2006) (prior affirmance of convictions and death sentence)
- State v. Roberts, 110 Ohio St.3d 71 (Ohio 2006) (Roberts I: remand for resentencing due to judge–prosecutor ex parte drafting)
- State v. Roberts, 137 Ohio St.3d 230 (Ohio 2013) (Roberts II: failure to consider allocution in sentencing opinion required vacatur)
- Lockett v. Ohio, 438 U.S. 586 (U.S. 1978) (sentencer may consider any aspect of defendant’s character or record as mitigation)
- Eddings v. Oklahoma, 455 U.S. 104 (U.S. 1982) (sentencer cannot refuse to consider relevant mitigating evidence)
- Skipper v. South Carolina, 476 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1986) (evidence of post-arrest good behavior is mitigating)
- Coyle v. Davis, 475 F.3d 761 (6th Cir. 2007) (held that new mitigation on limited resentencing must be considered; not binding on Ohio)
- State v. Phillips, 74 Ohio St.3d 72 (Ohio 1995) (trial court must consider mitigation but need not discuss each item individually; independent reweighing can cure omission)
- State v. Ruff, 143 Ohio St.3d 114 (Ohio 2015) (test for allied/offenses of similar import)
- Glossip v. Gross, 135 S. Ct. 2726 (U.S. 2015) (method-of-execution claims require proof of known, available, less painful alternative)