43
Jury selection to begin Monday
The capital murder trial will proceed as scheduled.
YOUNGSTOWN — The 7th District Court of Appeals has dismissed the prosecution’s latest appeal in the capital murder case of Terrance Tate and, in doing so, refused the prosecution’s request to delay Tate’s trial pending the appeal.
Ninety-five potential jurors for this case will arrive at the Mahoning County Courthouse this morning for an orientation to the jury selection process.
Beginning Monday, prospective jurors will be interviewed individually by Judge R. Scott Krichbaum and prosecuting and defense lawyers out of earshot of other potential jurors.
Tate, 23, of Hilton Avenue, is charged with aggravated murder with a death-penalty specification in the fatal beating of Javonte Covington on his first birthday in April 2006.
In its most recent appeal, the prosecution alleged Judge Krichbaum erred by declining to vacate an earlier ruling by Judge John M. Durkin that Tate’s confession to police was inadmissible as trial evidence because police didn’t warn Tate in a timely manner while he was in police custody of his right to remain silent.
Judge Krichbaum, who will preside over Tate’s trial, and Judge Durkin, who was earlier assigned the case, are judges of Mahoning County Common Pleas Court.
When the prosecution earlier appealed Judge Durkin’s suppression order, the 7th District Court of Appeals unanimously upheld Judge Durkin.
In their latest appeal, prosecutors said they had new evidence that Tate and his mother colluded to defraud Judge Durkin’s court at the suppression hearing. Tate told a fellow jail inmate that Tate and his mother worked out a plan to get his confession suppressed, prosecutors said.
Tate admitted to the inmate that his mother agreed to testify at the hearing that she was held against her will, thus compelling Tate to turn himself in to police, prosecutors said. However, Tate told his fellow inmate that he actually went voluntarily to the police station, prosecutors added.
Prosecutors argued in their most recent appeal that Judge Krichbaum should have vacated Judge Durkin’s suppression order and revisited the issue by setting the matter for a rehearing.
In the majority opinion released Thursday afternoon, appeals Judge Cheryl L. Waite wrote that the appeals court had no jurisdiction to accept the most recent appeal. Appeals Judge Mary DeGenaro agreed.
“The rules of criminal procedure provide the state with one direct appeal of an adverse ruling of a suppression motion,” Judge Waite wrote. “Appellant has pursued that appeal and was unsuccessful,” she added.
Appeals Judge Gene Donofrio dissented, saying he believes the appeals court had jurisdiction to accept the latest appeal. But, based on the facts and procedural history of the Tate case, Donofrio wrote that he believed the appellate panel should exercise its discretion and refuse to consider the most recent appeal.