43
Mahoning County man could be tried a fifth time for the murder of an Austintown woman
By Marc Kovac
COLUMBUS
The Ohio Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that a Mahoning County man could be tried a fifth time in 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.
Anderson’s lawyer, John B. Juhasz, said he does not know whether he will appeal in federal court because he hasn’t yet spoken to Anderson and his family about the Ohio Supreme Court decision.
“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 he was later arrested and charged with 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 purportedly choked 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 Kennedy added in the decision, “Anderson’s continued incarceration is a result of his inability to post the required bond set by the trial court. The question of whether that bond is appropriate, under these circumstances, is not before us.”
She was joined by Justices Terrence O’Donnell and Judith L. French in the decision.
Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor concurred in the judgment only, while Justices Judith Ann Lanzinger and Paul E. Pfeifer concurred in the judgment but offered a separate opinion.
Justice Lanzinger wrote, “It has been 14 years since Anderson was indicted for murder ... an offense subject to a mandatory prison sentence of 15 years to life. ... If Anderson’s trial were to be held tomorrow, he would presumably receive credit for time served and, as unusual as it may sound, he would be eligible for parole a relatively short time after his conviction. This is an extraordinary situation. On the one hand, Anderson is charged with a horrific crime, and the public and the victim’s loved ones certainly have an interest in seeing justice served in this case. On the other hand, Anderson remains unconvicted of that crime, and his 14 years of continued incarceration seems to violate his fundamental interest in personal liberty.”
Justice William M. O’Neill was the lone dissenter.