Wednesday, September 14, 2016
COLUMBUS — The Ohio Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that a Mahoning County man could be tried a fifth time for the murder of an Austintown woman, despite previous mistrials, hung juries and legal proceedings that have stretched over a dozen plus years.
In a 6-1 decision, justices sent Christopher Anderson’s case back to the trial court for further proceedings.
“While we are deeply troubled that a final resolution in this case has not been reached, there is no prohibition in the federal or Ohio Double Jeopardy Clauses that bars a defendant’s retrial after several mistrials have been declared,” Justice Sharon L. Kennedy wrote in the final decision. “A double-jeopardy review is triggered only when a final resolution has been made, and that has not occurred here.”
The case focuses on Amber Zurcher who was found dead on the floor of her apartment in June 2002. She was lying naked near the door, likely strangled with a cord or wire, according to documents.
Anderson was among people who had partied at Zurcher’s apartment hours before and was later arrested for her murder. During subsequent legal proceedings, prosecutors presented DNA samples connecting Anderson to Zurcher — evidence found under the victim’s fingernails and a bite wound on her left breast.
Anderson’s legal counsel, however, countered in documents that there was no evidence to show that Anderson murdered the victim or explaining how he gained entrance to her apartment, which was locked from the inside, with no signs of forced entry.
An initial trial ended in a mistrial after a witness mentioned an encounter between Anderson and another woman, during which the defendant allegedly chocked and bit that woman’s breast, according to documents.
Anderson was convicted at a second trial and sentenced to 15 years to life in prison, but that outcome was reversed by an appeals court. Several additional attempts to convict Anderson of the murder have ended with deadlocked juries.
Anderson, who has remained in jail for 14 years during the proceedings, filed a motion to dismiss as prosecutors announced intentions to seek an additional trial, arguing that “continuing to prosecute him without new evidence” was unconstitutional, according to documents.
But the Ohio Supreme Court was not swayed by Anderson’s arguments, noting in the majority decision Wednesday that he “has not pointed to anything in the text or history of the federal or Ohio Double Jeopardy Clauses or precedents interpreting them that supports his position. Moreover, Anderson has not identified any other similar case in which a court dismissed, on double jeopardy grounds, an indictment after the reversal of a conviction on appeal coupled with multiple mistrials. Instead, Anderson relies on a series of decisions that are readily distinguishable from this case.”
Justice William M. O’Neill was the lone dissenter.