Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17

Thread: Jeronique D. Cunningham - Ohio Death Row

  1. #11
    Senior Member CnCP Legend FFM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,363
    Wonder how this one will end.....

  2. #12
    Moderator Bobsicles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    7,318
    An expanded Certificate of Appealability denied by the Sixth Circuit.

    https://law.justia.com/cases/federal...020-08-24.html
    Thank you for the adventure - Axol

    Tried so hard and got so far, but in the end it doesn’t even matter - Linkin Park

    Hear me, my chiefs! I am tired. My heart is sick and sad. From where the sun now stands, I will fight no more forever. - Hin-mah-too-yah-lat-kekt

    I’m going to the ghost McDonalds - Garcello

  3. #13
    Administrator Moh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    13,014
    On May 12, 2021, oral argument will be held in Cunningham's appeal before the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. The panel will be made up of Judges Moore (Clinton), Kethledge (G.W. Bush) and White (G.W. Bush).

    https://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/sites/c...20Video%29.pdf

  4. #14
    Moderator Bobsicles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    7,318
    Reversed and remanded to the federal district court for an evidentiary hearing on juror bias.

    https://law.justia.com/cases/federal...022-01-10.html
    Thank you for the adventure - Axol

    Tried so hard and got so far, but in the end it doesn’t even matter - Linkin Park

    Hear me, my chiefs! I am tired. My heart is sick and sad. From where the sun now stands, I will fight no more forever. - Hin-mah-too-yah-lat-kekt

    I’m going to the ghost McDonalds - Garcello

  5. #15
    Moderator Bobsicles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    7,318
    Lima man seeks to have death penalty vacated

    By J Swygart
    limaohio.com

    LIMA — A Lima man currently housed on Ohio’s death row for his role in the so-called Eureka Street murders more than 20 years ago is seeking to have his death penalty set aside in favor of life in prison without parole.

    Paperwork was filed Monday in Allen County Clerk of Courts Office on behalf of Jeronique Cunningham seeking post-conviction relief “due to serious mental illness at the time of offense.”

    Cunningham was convicted by an Allen County jury in June of 2002 of the murders of Jala Grant and Leneshia Williams. The jury recommended that Cunningham be sentenced to death.

    The court document filed earlier this week on Cunningham’s behalf argues that his death sentence should be set aside because Cunningham has been diagnosed by multiple experts to suffer from Schizoaffective Disorder. At the time of the offense, the document claims, the disorder “significantly impaired his capacity to exercise rational judgement.”

    Jackson’s attorneys are requesting an evidentiary hearing in addition to asking the court for to allow the appointment of a mitigation investigator and an independent psychologist “to determine Cunningham’s mental illness status and the full impact of his mental illness on the crime.”

    The document claims Cunningham meets the requirements under Ohio law to have his death penalty set aside.

    Cunningham and his half-brother, Cleveland Jackson Jr., were each sentenced to die for the killing of two girls, ages 3 and 17, during a 2002 drug-related robbery on Eureka Street in Lima.

    Under a state law that took effect April 12, 2021, the persons diagnosed with four enumerated mental illnesses may not be executed.

    If the death sentence is voided, the document states that Cunningham acknowledges that he will be sentenced to life in prison without parole.

    https://www.limaohio.com/news/505052...enalty-vacated
    Thank you for the adventure - Axol

    Tried so hard and got so far, but in the end it doesn’t even matter - Linkin Park

    Hear me, my chiefs! I am tired. My heart is sick and sad. From where the sun now stands, I will fight no more forever. - Hin-mah-too-yah-lat-kekt

    I’m going to the ghost McDonalds - Garcello

  6. #16
    Senior Member CnCP Legend Mastro Titta's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    Prato, Italy
    Posts
    1,275
    In today's orders, the United States Supreme Court DENIED State of Ohio's petition for certiorari, and GRANTED respondent Cunningham's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis.

    Lower Ct: United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
    Case Numbers: (11-3005, 20-3429)
    Decision Date: January 10, 2022
    Rehearing Denied: March 28, 2022

    https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/...22zor_f2bh.pdf

  7. #17
    Administrator Helen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    20,875
    ‘It Is an Injustice’: Justice Thomas Slams Sixth Circuit for ‘Profound Disrespect’ to Death Penalty Jurors, Murder Victims and Even Congress

    By Elura Nanos
    Law & Crime

    Justice Clarence Thomas on Monday waged yet another head-on attack on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, penning a furious dissent over the Supreme Court’s refusal to reconsider Shoop v. Cunningham.

    Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch joined Thomas’ dissent, which slammed the 6th Circuit for its repeated refusal to follow the rules of a federal statute governing habeas corpus petitions.

    Jeronique Cunningham was convicted of armed robbery and capital murder and sentenced to death by an Ohio jury in 2002. Cunningham had been involved in a drug deal turned violent, and fatally shot 3-year-old girl, Jala Grant and 17-year-old Leneshia Williams. Cunningham also shot and injured six others.

    After his conviction, Cunningham filed a claim for federal habeas corpus relief on the basis that he had been deprived of due process because of juror’s bias against him.

    The jury foreperson, Nichole Mikesell, received information about Cunningham from her colleagues at the county’s children-services agency. Mikesell was a child-abuse investigator for the agency who worked regularly with local law enforcement. However, during the voir dire process, Mikesell answered that she had no trouble being impartial and she did not disclose any personal connection to the case.

    When Cunningham appealed his conviction, it came to light that Mikesell had been told by colleagues that they were afraid of Cunningham, and that Mikesell herself believed Cunningham to be “evil” and have “no redeeming qualities.” The precise timing of Mikesell’s receipt of background information — specifically, whether Mikesell had heard the comments from coworkers before or after Cunningham’s trial — was not determined during the appeal investigation.

    Additionally, the defense investigation related to the appeal revealed that two jurors said they remembered Mikesell saying she knew the families of Cunningham’s victims, and maintained a relationship with them through her employment.

    Cunningham filed a habeas corpus claim in which he alleged juror bias based on Mikesell’s information about Cunningham and her relationship with the victims’ families. The district court denied his claim, but the 6th Circuit reversed. Specifically, the appellate court ruled that any “colorable claim” of outside influence entitles a defendant to an evidentiary hearing on the issue of juror bias.

    The state appealed, and because SCOTUS denied certiorari, the 6th Circuit’s ruling will stand.

    Generally, under the federal Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA), courts are prohibited from granting habeas relief to state prisoners, unless the underlying state ruling was based on “an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.”

    In his dissent to the denial of certiorari, Thomas argued that Cunningham’s habeas claim was not such a case that demanded further review.

    “Cunningham merely alleged that outside contact had occurred, based on a speculative reading of an ambiguous postverdict statement,” said Thomas. When the 6th circuit ordered that Cunningham had the right to a hearing, said Thomas, it usurped discretion to which it was not entitled.

    The appellate ruling “shows profound disrespect, not merely to the State, but to citizens who perform the difficult duty of serving on capital juries, to the surviving victims of Cunningham’s atrocious crimes, to the memories of the two young girls whose lives he snuffed out, and to their families who still, two decades later, have no assurance that justice will ever be done,” said Thomas.

    “Worse and more importantly,” wrote Thomas, “any evidentiary hearing on Cunningham’s family-relationship claim would be an abuse of discretion no matter what court ordered it.” He continued, “The entire factual basis for this claim consists of the foreperson’s statements in the jury room as recalled in two other jurors’ years-later testimony.”

    Thomas lamented the injustice sure to come as a result of the 6th Circuit’s ruling:”[jurors’] every word will be picked apart in the hunt for further excuses to drag out this 16-year-old federal habeas action.”

    The justice continued with harsh words for the Circuit Court and its impact on Cunningham’s victims:

    The 6th circuit’s decision is more than an error—it is an injustice. It shows profound disrespect, not merely to the State, but to citizens who perform the difficult duty of serving on capital juries, to the surviving victims of Cunningham’s atrocious crimes, to the memories of the two young girls whose lives he snuffed out, and to their families who still, two decades later, have no assurance that justice will ever be done.

    Thomas also pointed a finger at his fellow justices, remarking, “I disagree with the Court’s newfound tolerance for recidivism,” but qualifying that regardless of SCOTUS’ errors, “primary responsibility for the Sixth Circuit’s errors rests with the Sixth Circuit.”

    “That court’s record of ‘plain and repetitive’ AEDPA error, is an insult to Congress and a disservice to the people of Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee,” he added.

    Thomas wrote that the 6th Circuit’s ruling not only “denies society the right to punish some admitted offenders,” but also “intrudes on state sovereignty,” and called the ruling an example of “overt defiance” of SCOTUS’ past precedent.

    Thomas even went a step farther and called out (though did not name) specific judges for their erroneous rulings.

    “[C]ertain circuit judges’ ‘taste for disregarding AEDPA,’ has found its natural complement in other judges’ distaste for correcting errors en banc, no matter how blatant, repetitive, or corrosive of circuit law,” wrote Thomas, who pointed to the “depressing regularity” with which cases like Cunningham’s reach SCOTUS.

    Thomas’ disdain for the 6th Circuit’s handling of AEDPA claims is nothing new. In June, Thomas penned another lengthy dissent in which he said that the 6th Circuit has made almost two dozen AEDPA-related errors in the last two decades.

    https://lawandcrime.com/supreme-cour...even-congress/
    "I realize this may sound harsh, but as a father and former lawman, I really don't care if it's by lethal injection, by the electric chair, firing squad, hanging, the guillotine or being fed to the lions."
    - Oklahoma Rep. Mike Christian

    "There are some people who just do not deserve to live,"
    - Rev. Richard Hawke

    “There are lots of extremely smug and self-satisfied people in what would be deemed lower down in society, who also deserve to be pulled up. In a proper free society, you should be allowed to make jokes about absolutely anything.”
    - Rowan Atkinson

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •