Gary Beeman
(Seen above) Ohio Conviction: 1976, Acquitted: 1979
Beeman was convicted of aggravated murder and sentenced to death. He maintained that he was innocent and that Claire Liuzzo, an escaped prisoner who testified as the main prosecution witness at Beeman's first trial, was the actual killer. In 1978 the District Court of Appeals granted Beeman a new trial, finding that Beeman's right to cross-examine Liuzzo had been unfairly restricted at his first trial. On retrial five witnesses testified that they heard Liuzzo confess to the murder and Beeman was acquitted. (Ashtabula Star Beacon, Oct. 5, 1979, p.1; Sept. 29, 1979, p.14).
__________________________________________________
Dale Johnston
(Seen above) Ohio Conviction: 1984, Charges Dismissed: 1990
Johnston was sentenced to death for the murder of his stepdaughter and her fiancée. His conviction was overturned in 1988 by the Ohio Supreme Court because the prosecution withheld exculpatory evidence from the defense, and because one witness had been hypnotized. The state later dropped charges against Johnston. (State v. Johnson, 529 N.E.2d 898 (Ohio 1988)).
__________________________________________________
Timothy Howard (Seen above) Ohio Convicted: 1976, Charges Dismissed: 2003
Gary Lamar James (Seen above) Ohio Convicted: 1976, Charges Dismissed: 2003
Timothy Howard and Gary James were arrested in December, 1976 for a Columbus, Ohio bank robbery in which one of the bank guards was murdered. Both men maintained their innocence throughout the trial. In 1978, Ohio's death penalty was held to be unconstitutional and all death row inmates were re-sentenced. Howard and James were given life sentences. With funding from Centurion Ministries of New Jersey, Howard and James were subsequently able to uncover new evidence not made available to their defense attorneys at the time of their trial, including conflicting witness statements and fingerprints. James agreed to and passed a state-administered polygraph test, prompting Franklin County prosecutor Ron O'Brien to dismiss all charges "in the interest of justice." Howard was freed earlier on April 23 when Franklin County Common Pleas judge Michael Watson overturned his conviction, citing evidence not disclosed or available at trial. The state dropped its appeal of the judge's ruling, thereby clearing him of the same charges. While O'Brien said that releasing the two men was an admission of a 26-year-old unsolved murder and robbery, "[w]e don't want anybody in prison serving time for something they didn't do." (Columbus Dispatch, July 16, 18, and 21, 2003)
__________________________________________________
Derrick Jamison
Derrick Jamison (Seen above)
Ohio Conviction: 1985, Charges Dismissed: 2005
On February 28, 2005, Ohio Common Pleas Judge Richard Niehaus dismissed all charges against Derrick Jamison for the death of a Cincinnati bartender after prosecutors elected not to retry him in the case. (Associated Press, March 3, 2005). The prosecution had withheld critical eyewitness statements and other evidence from the defense resulting in the overturning of Jamison's conviction in 2002. Jamison was originally convicted and sentenced to death in 1985 based in part on the testimony of Charles Howell, a co-defendant who received a lesser sentence in exchange for his testimony against Jamison. The prosecution withheld statements that contradicted Howell’s testimony and that would have undermined the prosecution’s theory of how the victim died, and would have pointed to other possible suspects for the murder. Two federal courts ruled that the prosecution's actions denied Jamison of a fair trial. (Jamison v. Collins, 291 F.3d 380 (6th Cir. 2002)). One of the withheld statements involved James Suggs, an eyewitness to the robbery. Suggs testified at trial that he had been unable to make a positive identification when the police showed him a photo array of suspects. In fact, police records show that Suggs identified two suspects, neither of which was Derrick Jamison. Additional withheld evidence consisted of a series of discrepancies between Jamison’s physical characteristics and the descriptions of the perpetrators given to police investigators by eyewitnesses. The co-defendant Howell recently testified that he could not remember anything about the crime, and state prosecutors decided not to proceed against Jamison. He remains incarcerated on other unrelated charges. (See also, K. Perry, "'85 Murder Conviction Dismissed," Cincinnati Post, Mar. 1, 2005).
Life After Death Row
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brad-rothschild/life-after-death-row_b_1478754.html
___________________________________________________________
Joe D'Ambrosio
On January 23, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal by the state of Ohio challenging the unconditional writ of habeas corpus and bar to the re-prosecution of Joe D'Ambrosio (pictured), thus ending the capital case. He has now been freed from death row with all charges dismissed. A federal District Court had first overturned D'Ambrosio's conviction in 2006 because the state had withheld key evidence from the defense. The federal court originally allowed the state to re-prosecute him, but just before trial the state revealed the existence of even more important evidence and requested further delay. Also the state did not divulge in a timely manner that the key witness against D'Ambrosio had died. In 2010, the District Court barred D’Ambrosio’s re-prosecution because of the prosecutors’ misconduct. The court concluded that these developments biased D'Ambrosio's chances for a fair trial, and hence the state was barred from retrying him. District Court Judge Kathleen O'Malley wrote: “For 20 years, the State held D’Ambrosio on death row, despite wrongfully withholding evidence that ‘would have substantially increased a reasonable juror’s doubt of D’Ambrosio’s guilt.’ Despite being ordered to do so by this Court … the State still failed to turn over all relevant and material evidence relating to the crime of which D’Ambrosio was convicted. Then, once it was ordered to provide D’Ambrosio a constitutional trial or release him within 180 days, the State did neither. During those 180 days, the State engaged in substantial inequitable conduct, wrongfully retaining and delaying the production of yet more potentially exculpatory evidence… To fail to bar retrial in such extraordinary circumstances surely would fail to serve the interests of justice.”
In 2011, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit upheld the bar to re-prosecution. (D'Ambrosio v. Bagley, No. 10-3247, Aug. 29, 2011). Even the dissent referred to the state's "remarkable inability to competently prosecute D'Ambrosio." The state appealed this decision to the U.S. Supreme Court mainly on jurisdictional grounds, but was denied certiorari on Jan. 23. (Bagley v. D'Ambrosio, No. 11-672, denying cert.).
D'Ambrosio is 140th former death row inmate to be exonerated since 1973 and the 6th from Ohio. He was first indicted for the offense in 1988.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-ohios-substantial-inequitable-conduct-leads-nations-140th-death-row-exoneration?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook
Related News Articles
(Should not be considered all inclusive.)
___________________________________________________________
Thomas Keenan
http://ohiodeathrow.blogspot.com/2009/05/thomas-keenan.html
______________________________
Source;
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-cases-1984-1993#43
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-cases-1994-2003
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-cases-2004-present
http://www.daytondailynews.com/n/content/oh/index/news/special-reports/deathrow/index.html
___________________________________________________________
Home History Inmates Annual Report Justice Initiative Scheduled Executions Clemency Execution Process Media Executed Innocence Exonerated Petitions Pen Pal FAQ Updates
___________________________________________________________
