On March 5, 2010, former Ohio death row inmate Joe D'Ambrosio exited the Justice Center in Cleveland, Ohio as a free man -- fully removed from the confines of state custody for the first time since his arrest in 1988 -- pursuant to a federal court order requiring his release and barring the state from reprosecuting him for the capital crime for which he had been imprisoned for over 20 years. That event followed more than seven years of federal and state court litigation, and hundreds of pro bono hours, by a team of Jones Day lawyers. Print and television media covered the day's proceedings ending with D'Ambrosio's release.

In 1989, D'Ambrosio was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death in Ohio's Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas. All along, D'Ambrosio consistently maintained his innocence and spurned deals offered by the State that would have required him to acknowledge a role in the murder. In 2002, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio appointed Jones Day attorneys John Q. Lewis and Edward Sebold, and Cleveland attorney, Jeffrey Kelleher, to represent the defendant. After significant investigation and briefing, the Jones Day team presented witness testimony and documentary evidence at a three-day evidentiary hearing in July 2004, focusing on exculpatory evidence withheld by prosecutors during D'Ambrosio's 1989 trial. On March 24, 2006, in a sweeping 107-page opinion, the District Court ruled that many important pieces of exculpatory Brady evidence that would have significantly aided the defense were wrongfully withheld, the cumulative effect of which undermined confidence in the original trial's outcome and the death sentence. Notably, prosecutors withheld the existence of another suspect with a motive to kill the victim, as well as several pieces of evidence that would have impeached the state’s only eyewitness, Eddie Espinoza, who had linked the defendant to the murder, including conclusions made by police officers who did not believe the crime had taken place as Espinoza alleged. In June of 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed, agreeing with the District Court that, had the evidence been properly disclosed, "there is a reasonable probability that the outcome of the trial would have been different." John Lewis presented oral argument before the Sixth Circuit.

After the Sixth Circuit affirmance, the State of Ohio chose to pursue a retrial in the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas, and the Jones Day team continued to assist in D'Ambrosio's defense. In a March 2009 pretrial bond hearing, Lewis successfully argued for a reduced bond and release subject to house arrest, allowing D'Ambrosio to leave the state penitentiary system for the first time since 1988. During later re-trial proceedings, the Jones Day team and D'Ambrosio's state court trial counsel became aware of additional discoverable, and potentially exculpatory, evidence and filed a motion for sanctions. The state trial court held that it would not proceed "with another unconstitutional trial" and that the trial must be continued as a sanction against the State. The state trial court's decision had ramifications on the District Court's 2006 habeas ruling, which required that D'Ambrosio be retried within 180 days. Given the state trial court's sanctions ruling, the State could not comply with the District Court's 180-day deadline.

The State thereafter filed a motion with the District Court seeking to extend the 180-day deadline, which the Jones Day team, with the assistance of federal appeal specialist David Mills, opposed. D'Ambrosio argued that the State's motion should be denied, that he should be immediately released, and that the District Court should forever bar reprosecution due to the State's failure to comply with the 180-day deadline. The District Court held a hearing on April 1 and 2, 2009, at which the Jones Day team examined several witnesses, including State prosecutors, and presented argument. On April 27, 2009, the District Court granted partial relief, denying the State's motion for extension, ordering D'Ambrosio's release pending rearraignment, and ordering expungement of all criminal records except the original indictment. The District Court did not, at that time, bar the State from reprosecuting D'Ambrosio, finding that D'Ambrosio could not prove "substantial prejudice" due to the delay in his retrial proceedings. Jones Day appealed that latter portion of the District Court's decision refusing to bar reprosecution.

In a remarkable turn of events, D'Ambrosio discovered in July 2009 that, in fact, the State's star and sole alleged eyewitness, Espinoza, had died on April 26, 2009. Based on this new development, D'Ambrosio first moved in the state trial court to exclude Espinoza's prior testimony under the Confrontation Clause because he was unable to cross-examine Espinoza with the withheld exculpatory evidence. Lewis argued the motion in the state trial court, and the state trial court agreed, barring the State's use of Espinoza's prior testimony in any retrial. Thereafter, D'Ambrosio filed a motion under Federal Rule 60(b) asking the District Court to vacate the April 27, 2009 order refusing to bar reprosecution and instead find that, based on Espinoza's death, reprosecution should be barred because D'Ambrosio was prejudiced in not having the opportunity to use exculpatory evidence in his retrial through an Espinoza examination. On October 6, 2009, Lewis and Mills presented argument before the District Court. After the District Court (pursuant to Rule 60(b)) requested and received remand of the case from the Sixth Circuit, the District Court ruled in D'Ambrosio's favor, vacated the April 27, 2009 order refusing to bar reprosecution and, instead, entered an order barring the State from reprosecuting D'Ambrosio for any of the crimes for which he had been arrested in 1988. Citing heavily from Lewis's October 6 oral argument, the District Court found that Espinoza's death "prejudices D'Ambrosio's defense in three highly material ways" and that "[h]ad this Court known of that prejudice on April 27, 2009, it would not have permitted reprosecution to proceed."

The Jones Day team was led by partner John Q. Lewis (Cleveland), and included partners Ed Sebold (Houston) and Louis Chaiten (Cleveland), and associates Matt Silversten (Cleveland), Chris Georgalis (Cleveland) and Jeff Manghillis (Columbus).

March 3, 2010 U.S. District Court Decision

April 27, 2009 U.S. District Court Decision

To learn more about the Firm's commitment to pro bono, please visit the Jones Day Pro Bono web site.