Judge denies relief for man who led assault
Judge John Durkin listens to testimony - Terrance Tate, whose confession was suppressed by the 7th District Court of Appeals, 8:30 a.m. The prosecution is appealing the suppression to the Ohio Supreme Court. Tate faces the death penalty.
The ringleader in a robbery and triple murder remains on death row.
STAFF REPORT
YOUNGSTOWN — Willie S. Herring, the man convicted of killing three people in an April 1996 robbery at the Newport Inn bar, has been denied post-conviction relief from his three death sentences.
On Friday, Judge John M. Durkin of Mahoning County Common Pleas Court denied the relief for Herring, 31, who remains on Ohio’s death row after being convicted in a 1998 jury trial of multiple counts of aggravated murder, attempted aggravated murder and complicity to aggravated murder.
Herring was one of five men convicted in the Newport Inn robbery, but he was the only one sentenced to death.
The Ohio Supreme Court ruled in 2002 that Herring was clearly the ringleader of the gang that burst into the bar, robbed the cash register and opened fire on its patrons and employees. Three people were killed and at least two were seriously injured.
After Judge Durkin first overruled Herring’s petition for post-conviction relief in 2003, the 7th District Court of Appeals sent the matter back to him, ordering that he have a hearing on just one issue.
That issue was determining whether an expert hired by the defense for the penalty determination phase advised the defense lawyers that he did not do his intended and required research on the case before the trial.
Judge Durkin concluded that the expert, Thomas J. Hrdy, never advised defense lawyers Gary Van Brocklin and Thomas Zena that his investigation was incomplete and never asked them for more time to complete it.
Judge Durkin concluded that the defense lawyers’ presentation during the penalty determination phase that followed the guilty verdicts was reasonable and complied with norms of the legal profession.
Van Brocklin and Zena testified in Judge Durkin’s hearing “that they were never informed of Hrdy’s investigation shortcomings, and they believed Hrdy did all the work that he needed to do at the time,” Judge Durkin wrote in his judgment entry.