Jones admitted at trial that he killed Yates but claimed it was accidental — that she had asked him to apply pressure to her throat during sex and he went too far. The state presented DNA evidence linking Jones to Yates, medical examiner testimony that her injuries were inconsistent with his account, and evidence that Jones had pleaded guilty in 1990 to two counts of attempted rape involving a victim he had choked and threatened to kill. The jury convicted Jones on all charges, including aggravated murder and rape, and recommended death. The trial court accepted that recommendation.
On appeal from the Northern District of Ohio's denial of his federal habeas petition, Jones pressed three clusters of claims. The Sixth Circuit, in an opinion authored by Judge Julia Smith Gibbons and joined by Judges Griffin and Thapar, held that none warranted relief.
On the Confrontation Clause issue, Jones argued that the trial court improperly allowed his wife Delores's out-of-court statements — relayed through her friend Charlette Jeffries and Detective Richard Morrison — to come in as evidence. Jeffries testified that Delores arrived at her home upset and screaming and immediately told Jeffries that Jones had murdered the woman found in the cemetery. The court held that the Ohio Supreme Court reasonably concluded Delores's statements to Jeffries were non-testimonial and thus did not implicate the Confrontation Clause. As for Morrison's testimony, both parties agreed it violated Jones's confrontation rights, but the panel held that the Ohio Supreme Court's harmless-error finding was not unreasonable under AEDPA, given Jones's own admission that he killed Yates, the physical evidence, and the properly admitted Jeffries testimony.
On the guilt-phase ineffective assistance claim, Jones argued his counsel should have retained a forensic expert to rebut the state's medical examiner, George Sterbenz, on the rape counts. Jones submitted an affidavit from forensic pathologist Werner Spitz during post-conviction proceedings, but the panel held the Ohio Court of Appeals reasonably found no prejudice because Spitz failed to explain the contusions on Yates's head, the gouging injuries to her neck, or why a twig was found four to six inches inside her rectum.
The penalty-phase claims fared no better. Jones argued his mitigation team was appointed too late, failed to uncover evidence of childhood sexual abuse and family dysfunction, conducted an inadequate voir dire, and relied on a forensic psychologist who underdiagnosed his mental illness. The panel applied AEDPA's doubly deferential standard and held that the state courts' rejection of each claim was not objectively unreasonable. The mitigation team had asked Jones and his family members repeatedly about sexual abuse and received denials. The panel also held that the post-conviction expert testimony about Jones's mental illness — including a proposed schizoaffective disorder diagnosis — was cumulative to what the jury had already heard from the penalty-phase expert, James Siddall.
The case is No. 24-3356 in the Sixth Circuit.