Justices say defense fell short of national standards
By Andrew Welsh-Huggins
AP Legal Affairs Writer
COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) - A man condemned to die for fatally shooting three people in a 1996 bar robbery must be resentenced because his attorneys did a poor job looking for evidence that might have swayed a jury against a death sentence, a divided Ohio Supreme Court ruled Wednesday.
At issue in the court's 4-3 decision was the lack of information presented at sentencing about Willie Herring's chaotic childhood. An investigator hired by Herring's lawyers admitted he did a "substandard" investigation and failed, among other things, to interview Herring's family, according to Wednesday's ruling.
Herring, 34, received the death penalty for the triple slaying at the Newport Inn on April 30, 1996. Two other people were also shot but survived.
Justice Paul Pfeifer, writing for the majority, said lawyers' decision not to expand their investigation of Herring's background fell short of national standards for representing clients in death penalty cases.
The attorneys "failed to interview witnesses and obtain records about Herring's dysfunctional childhood, gang involvement, substance abuse and his mother's drug addiction," Pfeifer wrote.
The lawyers apparently did not know that Herring's father was shot to death in a drug dispute when Herring was 4 years old, Pfeifer added. Justices Judi French and William O'Neill and Chief Justice Maureen O'Connor agreed with the decision.
Justice Terrence O'Donnell, writing for the minority, said Herring's lawyers adopted a specific trial strategy and he didn't think a different approach would have changed the outcome. He noted that one of Herring's lawyers later testified that negative information about Herring would serve only to "bury him further."
"Defense counsel based the decision to present positive information on the composition of the particular jury panel, which they viewed as likely to impose the death sentence on Herring," O'Donnell said. He was joined by justices Judith Lanzinger and Sharon Kennedy.
Prosecutors are deciding how to proceed, said Mahoning County assistant prosecutor Ralph Rivera. He said a new sentencing hearing would require something close to an actual trial to get all the facts before new jurors.
"If you're going to essentially retry the case, and you have to bring forth all these witnesses, we would have to look into that, to see if it's possible," Rivera said.
If prosecutors decide not to seek a new hearing, Herring would likely face life without parole.
Published: Thu, Dec 04, 2014
