43
The Ohio Supreme Court grant a temporary stay requested by a retired businessman and a company in the Oakhill criminal-corruption case
YOUNGSTOWN
The Ohio Supreme Court granted a temporary stay requested by retired businessman Anthony Cafaro Sr. and one of his family company’s subsidiaries that won’t allow prosecutors in the Oakhill Renaissance Place criminal-corruption case to release certain evidence to the public.
What is being shielded isn’t clear.
Court documents in the Cafaro/Ohio Valley Mall Co. matter were filed under seal at the request of Cafaro and OVM and granted by the Cleveland-based 8th District Court of Appeals in a case called State of Ohio v. John Doe.
The Supreme Court made the ruling Friday in what it called the “grand jury proceeding of John Doe.”
However, there are some descriptions of filings listed on the court of appeals’ docket that show Cafaro and OVM filed a motion April 30 “for a stay of the trial court’s April 3, 2015, journal entry compelling disclosure of privileged documents and testimony” in the Oakhill case.
Cafaro and OVM are listed by prosecutors as unindicted members of an purported criminal enterprise that illegally, and unsuccessfully, tried to impede or stop the move of the Mahoning County Department of Job and Family Services from Garland Plaza, owned and operated by Cafaro Co. subsidiary Ohio Valley Mall, to Oakhill Renaissance Place, the former Forum Health Southside Medical Center owned by the county.
OVM received $440,000 a year in rent from the county to house JFS, which was relocated by county commissioners “because of the poor condition of the building and other issues,” according to prosecutors on this case.
Youngstown Mayor John A. McNally, a Democrat in his previous capacity as a Mahoning County commissioner; former county Auditor Michael V. Sciortino, also a Democrat; and attorney Martin Yavorcik, a failed 2008 independent candidate for county prosecutor, were indicted in Cuyahoga County on May 14, 2014, over their alleged involvement in the scandal. The three have pleaded not guilty.
They face a combined 83 criminal counts including engaging in a pattern of corrupt activity, bribery, conspiracy, perjury and money laundering.
Also, Sciortino was indicted June 4 in Mahoning County Common Pleas Court on 25 felony counts accusing him of illegally using county-owned computers and software. Prosecutors say he and three auditor employees at his direction improperly used the computers and software more than 300 times to raise money for political purposes to keep him in office and for his private law practice. He’s pleaded not guilty to the charges.
In the Cafaro and OVM matter, the court of appeals on July 2 rejected the request to keep secret certain documents in the Oakhill case with the two parties filing a motion July 7 to supplement their previous filings. That same day, the court of appeals filed a judgment entry. There are no details on that entry, but based on the Supreme Court ruling Friday, the lower court likely didn’t change its initial decision.
That’s because the Supreme Court announced Friday: “Upon consideration of appellants’ motion for an emergency stay of the lower court’s decisions, it is ordered by the court” that “the motion for emergency stay is granted.”
Supreme Court records on the matter also are sealed, but filings attached to that court’s case information show an appeal filed Monday by Cafaro and OVM, the Ohio Attorney General’s Office had until Wednesday to file a response but declined, and the court granted the emergency stay to not release certain documents and testimony in the Oakhill case Friday.
John McCaffrey, Cafaro’s attorney, said, “I can’t comment beyond what’s on the docket because the matter is under seal. Obviously, it’s a new matter. We are the party moving to have it filed.”
Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine, whose office is prosecuting the Oakhill case, declined to comment Friday to The Vindicator about this case after consulting with his staff.
An “emergency stay” is only temporary. Either the court of appeals or the Supreme Court would have to determine if and when that information is made public.
DeWine, a Republican, said he is limited in what he can say about the case.
“I’ll just speak in general,” but “there’s a reluctance to disclose much information to the news media frankly or to anybody once the case is in front of a judge,” he said. “I can’t get into details. What you’re worried about is someone saying that you are feeding pretrial publicity which prejudices a potential juror.”
Judge Janet R. Burnside of Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court is presiding over the case that is to start March 1, 2016.
When asked why prosecutors opted not to make public a witness list last month, DeWine said, “Our prosecutors made that decision. It’s being done in conjunction with Cuyahoga County. That decision was made at the trial level, and I didn’t overrule them.”