Elwood Jones, 73, has been living with his sister since his release from prison in 2023 after spending almost 30 years on Ohio's death row. A judge overturned his murder conviction in 2022.
Elwood Jones, 73, has been living with his sister since his release from prison in 2023 after spending almost 30 years on Ohio's death row. A judge overturned his murder conviction in 2022.
Home » News » National News » Ohio » Will new prosecutor keep fighting to send Elwood Jones back to prison?
Ohio

Will new prosecutor keep fighting to send Elwood Jones back to prison?

An Ohio Supreme Court ruling Thursday set the stage for a big decision from Hamilton County Prosecutor Connie Pillich: Whether to continue a years-long effort by her office to send Elwood Jones back to Ohio’s death row.

Video Thumbnail

Jones, who spent almost 30 years in prison awaiting execution, was freed in 2023 after Common Pleas Judge Wende Cross overturned his conviction. Cross ruled that the prosecutors who handled Jones’ original trial withheld thousands of pages of evidence from his defense lawyers.

Prosecutors appealed that ruling, however, arguing Cross erred in her decision. They asked the Ohio First District Court of Appeals for permission to appeal the lower court’s ruling.

When the appeals court refused, prosecutors turned to the Ohio Supreme Court, which ruled 5-3 Thursday in their favor.

But a lot has changed since prosecutors first asked to file their appeal, most notable is Pillich’s arrival as the county’s top prosecutor. Pillich, a Democrat, defeated incumbent Republican Melissa Powers in the November 2024 election.

Pillich now must decide whether she believes the appeal she inherited from her predecessor is worth pursuing. During her campaign, Pillich had been critical of the way the office had handled some murder convictions and vowed to create a special unit to review cases.

Jones’ case is among several homicide prosecutions that The Enquirer has found unraveled years after convictions. Some came into question because of accusations that evidence was withheld from the defense, and others because of the use of informants to secure a conviction.

When asked Thursday whether she would resume her office’s appeal in the Jones’ case, Pillich said she hadn’t yet decided.

“This case has been top of mind since I took office,” she said. “My team and I are reviewing today’s Ohio Supreme Court decision carefully, and then we will determine the appropriate next steps.”

Jones was sentenced to death three decades ago after a jury convicted him of beating to death Rhoda Nathan, a 67-year-old grandmother from New Jersey who was in Cincinnati for a bar mitzvah. Jones worked at the hotel where Nathan was staying and became a suspect after her death in 1994.

Jones remained on Ohio’s death row for decades, exhausting most of his appeals, until Hamilton County Common Pleas Judge Wende Cross overturned his murder conviction, freed him from prison and granted him a new trial two years ago. Cross found prosecutors withheld evidence from Jones’ lawyers during the first trial that could have resulted in jurors reaching a different conclusion about his guilt or innocence.

Jones’ lawyer, Jay Clark, said Pillich should dismiss her office’s appeal. He said the pursuit of Jones, who is now 73, has gone on long enough.

Clark also said that nothing in the Supreme Court decision suggests prosecutors will fare better when they return to the Ohio First District Court of Appeals. The high court’s majority concluded the appeals court failed to use the correct standard to evaluate the prosecutors’ request to appeal, not that their request had merit.

“The court of appeals failed to determine whether the State had demonstrated a high enough probability of trial-court error to warrant a discretionary appeal,” Justice Sharon Kennedy wrote in her majority opinion.

Clark called the Supreme Court ruling a “politically-motivated, results-oriented decision.” He said it did not establish what a “high probability” of trial court error would be and offered no guidance on how the First District, or any other court, should make such a determination.

In his dissenting opinion, Justice Pat Fischer said the First District “correctly exercised its discretion” in ruling against prosecutors. He also noted that the prosecution’s appeal did not address every basis of the decision overturning Jones’ conviction, which he said would make pursuing the appeal “futile.”

Pillich did not indicate when she would decide whether to continue the appeal.

This article originally appeared on Cincinnati Enquirer: Will new prosecutor keep fighting to send Elwood Jones back to prison?

Reporting by Dan Horn, Cincinnati Enquirer / Cincinnati Enquirer

USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect

Image

Related posts

Leave a Comment