43
High court to consider 6th trial for suspect in Austintown slaying
YOUNGSTOWN
The Ohio Supreme Court has agreed to consider whether Christopher Anderson can be tried for a sixth time in a June 3, 2002, Austintown homicide.
Anderson, 48, is charged with the strangulation murder of Amber Zurcher, 22, in her Compass West apartment.
Anderson, who maintains his innocence, has been jailed for more than 13 years awaiting disposition of this case.
The Anderson case was one of only four statewide that the top court accepted Wednesday for review, as it refused to hear 73 other cases.
Saying the charge and circumstances of the case haven’t changed, Judge Shirley J. Christian of Mahoning County Common Pleas Court refused a defense request in July to reduce Anderson’s $500,000 bond.
“If the state were now to convict Anderson at a sixth trial, no one could honestly look at the conviction and say that it was a fair process,” wrote Anderson’s lawyer, John B. Juhasz, in his appeal to the top court.
“It destroys the integrity of the courts to allow the government chance after chance, as many cracks as it takes to secure a conviction,” Juhasz wrote.
The appeal says the due-process clause of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution bars the prosecution “from making repeated attempts over a long course of time to convict a person by simply wearing him down when there is no new evidence of guilt.”
The appeal to the top court stems from a unanimous decision against Anderson by a three-judge panel of the 7th District Court of Appeals in May this year.
“While we recognize that, at some point, continued retrial will present too onerous a burden on appellant’s rights, that time has not yet come,” the panel ruled.
In May 2003, Judge James C. Evans declared a mistrial because of an unsolicited comment by a witness heard by jurors. He declared another mistrial in April 2010 because a defense lawyer fell asleep in court.
In November 2003, a jury convicted Anderson of murder and he was sentenced to 15 years to life in prison, but the conviction was overturned on appeal.
“Our office is obviously seeking a new trial based on the fact that he was convicted by a jury in the past,” explained Ralph Rivera, an assistant county prosecutor. “That’s the strongest consideration of why the state would seek to retry someone.”
Trials in December 2008 and August 2010 resulted in a hung jury.
Prosecutors noted, however, the 2008 jury voted 11-1 for conviction.