Case Review

JOE D'AMBROSIO
The Crime
On 24 September 1988, the body of 19-year old Estel Anthony Klann was found in a creek by a jogger. Klann had been stabbed three times in the chest; his face, chest, back and arms had been slashed; and his throat had been sliced. Three men were charged with the murder: Joseph DAmbrosio, Thomas Keenan and Edward Espinoza. On 23 September 1988, around 7:30 p.m., the victim visited a bar in Cleveland with Paul Lewis, where they met Thomas Keenan, a former employer of Lewis, and subsequently Edward Espinoza and Joe D'Ambrosio. According to Lewis's testimony, Espinoza got into a heated argument with Klann. After a few hours in the bar, Lewis left the bar alone. Around 1:30 a.m., Espinoza and D'Ambrosio left the bar and went to D'Ambrosio's apartment. When they arrived, Keenan drove up, telling them that Lewis had stolen some drugs from him and asked them to help him find Lewis to get the drugs back. They armed themselves with a baseball bat and knife taken from D'Ambrosio's apartment and drove around in search of Lewis. According to the testimony of Carolyn Rosel, she and a friend, James Russell, were awakened by the three men around 3:00 a.m. Keenan asked where Lewis was and he and Espinoza told Rosel and Russell that they wanted to kill Lewis for ripping Keenan off. They replied that they did not know where Lewis was. Espinoza testified that shortly after leaving the apartment they spotted the victim, Klann, walking by the road and Keenan forced him into the backseat of the truck next to D'Ambrosio. In the car Espinoza hit Klann on the head with the baseball bat and forced him to tell them where Lewis lived. Klann eventually provided Lewiss address and they drove to the apartment building. Residents said they were awakened around 3:30 a.m. by screaming, shouting and banging outside. After being directed to Lewis's door by another resident, Flanik, Keenan and Espinoza kicked it in while announcing repeatedly that they were going to kill Lewis. However, Lewis was not at home, so Keenan and Espinoza got back into the truck and drove away. Flanik testified that he saw DAmbrosio outside pointing a knife at Klanns face. Allegedly, the men returned to Rosels home to inquire whether Lewis had been there. Espinoza also told Russell to tell Lewis that they got a contract out on him and had the victim who they were going to kill and 'drop off'. Espinoza testified that the four then drove to Doans Creek, where they began interrogating Klann. When Klann again said he did not know anything, Keenan took DAmbrosios knife, slit Klanns throat and pushed him into the creek. According to Espinoza, Klann then got up and began to run. Keenan told D'Ambrosio to Finish him off. D'Ambrosio took the knife from Keenan and after a minute or two caught up with the victim and killed him. In the morning of 25 September, the coroner, Dr Elizabeth Balraj, performed the autopsy on the victim's corpse. She later testified that she found three stab wounds on the victim's chest and that his windpipe had been perforated in two places by a throat cut. In addition, she found some defensive wounds on the victim, which are usually sustained on the hands or arms while trying to block a stabbing.

-1-

The Trial
On 6 October 1988 D'Ambrosio and his two co-defendants, Keenan and Espinoza, were jointly indicted on the counts of (1) aggravated murder with prior calculation and design, R.C. 2903.01(A); (2) aggravated felony murder, R.C. 2903.01(B); (3) kidnapping, R.C. 2905.01; and (4) aggravated burglary of Lewis's apartment, R.C. 2911.11. D'Ambrosio pleaded not-guilty to all four counts. On 6 February 1989 the trial against D'Ambrosio commenced. D'Ambrosio waived his right to be tried before a jury and instead opted for a three judge panel.1 Just three days later, the judges reached their decision, sealing the verdict pending the culmination of Keenan's trial. Espinoza accepted a plea bargain and pleaded guilty to manslaughter. He testified against Keenan and D'Ambrosio. On 21 February 1989, after Keenan was convicted, DAmbrosios verdict of guilty on all four counts was announced. On 23 February, in the sentencing stage of the trial, the panel found that the aggravating circumstances outweighed the mitigating factors and sentenced D'Ambrosio to death on both aggravated murder counts. He was also sentenced to a term of 10 to 25 years on count (3) and 10-25 years on count (4), which were to run consecutively. Keenan was also sentenced to death. Keenans conviction and death sentence were overturned in 1993 when the Ohio Supreme Court found that the trial prosecutor, Carmen Marino, who also tried the case against DAmbrosio, had committed misconduct. The court found that Marino engaged in improper closing argument by unfairly disparaging the defence and Keenans friends, stabbing a large knife into counsel table and calling Keenan an "animal". Keenan was later retried, convicted and again sentenced to death.

Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus

DAmbrosios initial direct appeals were unsuccessful, with both his conviction and his sentence being affirmed by the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court of Ohio.2 On 3 October 2000, D'Ambrosio filed a notice of intent to file a petition for a writ of habeas corpus with the US District Court Northern District of Ohio Eastern Division ("District Court"). After filing this petition, D'Ambrosio subsequently filed an amended petition that included a claim pursuant to Brady v Maryland 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963) (a US Supreme Court case which held that withholding exculpatory evidence violates due process "where the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment"). On 2 December 2002, the District Court ordered the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor, the Cuyahoga County Coroner, the Cleveland Police Department and the Cleveland Heights Police Department to provide D'Ambrosio's counsel with evidentiary materials in their possession. Among other information, the District Court instructed the state to provide the complete and unredacted case files for D'Ambrosio's case and the cases of Keenan and Espinoza. The court also ordered the disclosure of any and all reports noting the collection and/or testing or test results of biological evidence collected in relation to the investigation of Klann's murder that may be in the possession of the Cuyahoga County Coroner and the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor SIU. This was to include but was not limited to DNA, blood, saliva, semen, hair and fingernail scrapings

He did later challenge the constitutional sufficiency of his conviction by the three judge panel, although the challenge was not successful. 2 Please see the Chronology for further detail.

-2-

After believing he had acquired all court-ordered discovery, D'Ambrosio filed a motion for summary judgment and a motion for an evidentiary hearing. In an order dated 4 March 2004, the District Court denied D'Ambrosio's motion for summary judgment without prejudice, but granted the motion for an evidentiary hearing on three of the grounds for relief raised in D'Ambrosio's petition: actual innocence, spoliation of evidence and the Brady claim. The District Court held a three-day evidentiary hearing, during which D'Ambrosio developed his Brady and spoliation claims by establishing that the state withheld and/or did not produce evidence that both undermined the state's theory of how the murder occurred and implicated another individual's motive to commit it. D'Ambrosio's trial counsel, Ralph DeFranco, testified that had he been in possession of the alleged Brady evidence prior to trial and he could have impeached several of the prosecution's witnesses, especially their most crucial witness: Espinoza. D'Ambrosio's counsel also attempted to demonstrate D'Ambrosio's actual innocence through the testimony of four alibi witnesses who testified that they were with D'Ambrosio on the night of Klann's murder.

Outcome of Habeas Corpus Petition

On 24 March 2006, the District Court issued an opinion granting in part and denying in part D'Ambrosio's petition. D'Ambrosio's claim of actual innocence was not granted, largely because of the very high standard of review applied to such a claim. The standard that D'Ambrosio had to prove was that he was "probably innocent" and the court reasoned that D'Ambrosio could not demonstrate this because of certain discrepancies between the evidentiary hearing witness testimonies and D'Ambrosio's own trial testimony. However, the court did grant the part of D'Ambrosio's petition in relation to the state's Brady violations. The court held that the state failed to provide D'Ambrosio with: (i) information that another individual, Paul Lewis, had a motive for killing Klann; (ii) reports indicating that two detectives initially assigned to the Klann murder investigation concluded that Klann had actually been killed elsewhere and his body subsequently dumped at Doan Creek; (iii) a cassette tape of a call to police from Angelo Crimi, who implicated other suspects in Klann's murder; (iv) trace evidence reports indicating that Klann was not wearing shoes or under-shorts when his body was discovered; and (v) a police report in which Linda Hudak stated that she saw Klann alive the night after the state asserted Klann had been killed. As a result of these violations, the District Court issued a conditional writ ordering the state either to set aside D'Ambrosio's conviction for aggravated murder and his death sentence or to retry him within 180 days. However, the court delayed the issuance of this writ, due to a pending appeal. The appeal came before the US Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit, a federal court with appellate jurisdiction over certain state courts, including the District Court of Ohio. On 5 June 2008, the 6th Circuit court found that "[b]ecause the evidence that the prosecution suppressed would have had the effect of both weakening the prosecution's case and strengthening the defence's position that someone else committed the murder, there is a reasonable probability that the outcome of the trial could have been different".

-3-

In light of the mandate from the 6th Circuit court, on 11 September 2008, the District Court issued their order that the state should either set aside D'Ambrosio's convictions and sentences, including the sentence of death, or conduct another trial, within 180 days of the date of the order from the District Court.

The State's Request for a Retrial

Following the order of 11 September 2008, the state requested a retrial, which was set for 2 March 2009. On 3 November 2008, counsel for D'Ambrosio filed a motion for discovery (a request to the court to order the opposing party to produce certain materials relevant to the case). A supplemental motion was filed by D'Ambrosio's counsel on 23 December 2008 for further information. The state did not respond in writing to either request. In early January 2009, D'Ambrosio's counsel asked the state for an inventory of all materials in its possession, but the state declined to provide one. Instead, the state turned over a searchable, indexed CD-ROM of Keenan's second trial and informed D'Ambrosio's counsel that the state intended to present the same evidence at D'Ambrosio's retrial that it used to convict Keenan. However, D'Ambrosio's counsel were not satisfied that the state had provided all of the relevant information to which D'Ambrosio was entitled and they complained to the court regarding the state's behaviour and lack of compliance with its legal obligations. The trial court ordered the state to supply the defence with all pertinent discovery by no later than 13 February 2009. The state produced evidence that had not previously been disclosed. This was primarily biological evidence from D'Ambrosio that could be used for DNA testing, such as blood evidence from his apartment, soil from the bank where the victim was found (which tested negative for blood), and soil samples from Keenan's truck. The state then filed a notice on 20 February 2009 indicating that D'Ambrosio's counsel had "actual possession or actual knowledge" of all discoverable materials relating to the matter. On that same day, the state also represented to the trial court that "[the defence] has everything and they've had everything from day one". The trial court refused to proceed with the retrial until D'Ambrosio had time to examine this new evidence. Therefore, the state returned to the District Court on 4 March 2009 (six days before the 180 days expiry) and asked for an extension of the time available to retry D'Ambrosio. DAmbrosio not only opposed this motion for extension, but asked the court to bar his reprosecution. On 6 March 2009, the District Court extended the 180 day deadline set forth in its ruling of 11 September 2008. This extension was for the sole purpose of allowing all parties a "full and fair opportunity" to litigate D'Ambrosio's request for the court to bar a retrial of this matter and to resolve whether the state should be granted a motion of extension to retry D'Ambrosio.

Denial of The State's Motion For Extension

On 27 April 2009, the District Court denied the states motion for extension. The court concluded that the state did not engage in a good-faith effort to comply with the courts order of 11 September 2008. The court highlighted that the state failed to respond to multiple discovery requests, produced important material at the very last minute and interfered in the progress of the trial through gamesmanship. The court issued an unconditional writ of habeas corpus and ordered DAmbrosios release from custody and the
-4-

strike out of his conviction and sentence. D'Ambrosio was released on bond, pending a possible retrial. However, despite their failure to get a time extension, the state did prevail on two key issues in the 27 April 2009 order. Firstly, the District Court declined to bar reprosecution of D'Ambrosio. Although the court concluded that reasonable minds could disagree with its views on this point, it found that, despite the repeated discovery abuses by the state, an order barring retrial would not be an appropriate exercise of the District Courts discretion. This conclusion rested primarily on the determination that DAmbrosio was not materially prejudiced by the additional delay caused by the states discovery violations. Secondly, the court stayed the issuance of the unconditional writ of habeas corpus for 15 days. The purpose of this stay was to allow the state an opportunity to determine whether it wished to retry DAmbrosio under the original indictment, and, if so, to seek DAmbrosios detention . The state took no action during this 15 day period.

Further Violations By The State And D'Ambrosio's Renewed Motion To Bar Retrial
In June 2009, further news came to the attention of D'Ambrosio's counsel. The state revealed that Espinoza had died on 26 April 2009 (after having been released from his reduced 12 year sentence which he had achieved by testifying against D'Ambrosio). The state learned of Espinozas death on 30 April 2009, but did not inform either DAmbrosio or the court until late June 2009. After D'Ambrosio was made aware of Espinoza's death, on 14 August 2009, he renewed the motion to bar retrial on the grounds that he would not be able to cross-examine Espinoza regarding the new evidence. On 17 November 2009, the District Court issued an order explaining that, although it had no jurisdiction over this matter because it was pending before the US Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit, the District Court would be inclined to grant DAmbrosios motion should the 6th Circuit court choose to exercise its discretion to re-vest the District Court with jurisdiction.

Success For D'Ambrosio - The Bar To Retrial

On 3 March 2010, the District Court struck out the part of the order of 27 April 2009 declining to bar D'Ambrosio's reprosecution and instead barred any attempt to reprosecute D'Ambrosio. The District Court's decision that D'Ambrosio could not be re-tried for the murder of Tony Klann was based on the prosecution's misconduct. The District Court judge found that the prosecution had deliberately withheld evidence that would have significantly affected the jury's perspective of the case and would have increased any reasonable doubt of D'Ambrosio's guilt. In agreement with D'Ambrosio, the judge also noted that the death of Espinoza, the main witness against D'Ambrosio, would have prevented him from receiving a fair retrial. In November 2010, the state of Ohio appealed the District Court ruling that barred reprosecution of D'Ambrosio, claiming that the District Court lacked the jurisdiction to do so. On 29 August 2011, the 6th Circuit court upheld the District Court ruling that the state cannot retry D'Ambrosio for the murder of Tony Klann. The 6th Circuit court noted the incompetence of the state in their attempt to prosecute D'Ambrosio; even the dissenting opinion made clear that the prosecution's actions in this case had been inept, stating that the state had "botched" the 1988 trial.

-5-

On the same jurisdictional grounds, the state appealed this decision to the Supreme Court, but was denied a review of the lower courts' judgments.

Life After Death Row

On 23 January 2012, Joe DAmbrosio became the 6th man from Ohio and the 140th in America to be exonerated from death row. Once freed, he moved back to where he grew up in North Royalton, Ohio. According to the Plain Dealer newspaper, he left prison with no pension and no retirement fund. His only source of income was $35 a month in social security. He decided to return to the courts to seek compensation and redress for the time he spent on death row. On 11 January 2013, he was granted permission to file a lawsuit against the state of Ohio for wrongful imprisonment. It is estimated that he could be eligible for up to $1 million in compensation. This lawsuit is currently ongoing. D'Ambrosio also started proceedings against two county prosecutors and a homicide detective on the basis that they withheld key evidence in the 1988 murder trial. On 24 January 2013, Judge Dan Aaron Polster dismissed the claim. He did, however, state that the judgement should not be construed as "judicial endorsement of the conduct of the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor's office". DAmbrosio has become a campaigner against the death penalty and spends time raising awareness and sharing his personal experience. As well as many other speaking engagements, he is planning to take part in a speaking tour of university campuses as part of a joint campaign between "Ohioans to Stop Executions" and the "Witness to Innocence" programme.

Sources
http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/09/cuyahoga_county_prosecutor_to.html http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2009/02/do_not_publish_yet_cleveland.html http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2009/02/former_death_row_inmate_joe_da.html http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2009/03/lawyers_prosecutors_in_joe_dam.html http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2009/03/former_death_row_inmate_joe_da_1.html http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2009/08/joe_dambrosio_retrial_in_tony.html http://oh.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20090609_0000495.noh.htm/qx http://oh.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20090306_0000190.noh.htm/qx http://oh.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20090610_0007295.oh.htm/qx http://www.briefcase8.com/2011/09/the-price-of-nondisclosure.html http://stopwrongfulconvictions.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/ohios-substantial-inequitable-conductleads-to-death-row-exoneration-of-joe-dambrosio/ www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/11a0245p-06.pdf http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-ohios-substantial-inequitable-conduct-leads-nations140th-death-row-exoneration http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2010/03/d.html http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2010/03/post_237.html http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?page=5&xmldoc=20091047619acfsupp2d428_11019.xml& docbase=CSLWAR3-2007-CURR&SizeDisp=7

-6-

 D'Ambrosio v Bagley 619 F.Supp.2d 428 (2009) United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Eastern Division D'Ambrosio v Bagley; Case number 1:00-CV-2521 in the United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Eastern Division (3 March 2010) http://www.acluohio.org/archives/press-releases/u-s-supreme-court-declines-to-consider-statesappeal-in-joe-dambrosio-case http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2013/01/post_93.html http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2013/01/post_93.html http://search.cco.state.oh.us/scripts/cgiip.exe/WService=civilprod/ws_civilcasesearch_2007.r?mod e=5&CaseNo=201300049#top http://www.leagle.com/xmlresult.aspx?xmldoc=In%20FDCO%2020130124E20.xml&docbase=CsLw Ar3-2007-Curr http://www.otse.org/InnocenceTour.aspx Joe D'Ambrosio v Margaret Bagley, Warden before the United States District Court Northern District of Ohio Eastern Division Case: 1:00-cv-02521-KMO Doc#: 268 Filed: 03/03/10 http://www.joedambrosio.blogspot.co.uk/ http://www.cleveland.com/brett/blog/index.ssf/2012/01/joe_dambrosio_finally_free_spe.html http://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=3865

Review produced by Baker & McKenzie in collaboration with Amicus.

-7-

Chronology

JOE DAMBROSIO
24 September 1988 6 October 1988 Body of 19-year-old Estel Anthony Klann found in a creek in Cleveland. Joe D'Ambrosio is charged with the murder of Klann along with two codefendants, Thomas Keenan and Edward Espinoza. The indictment includes four separate counts: (1) aggravated murder with prior calculation and design; (2) aggravated felony murder; (3) kidnapping; and (4) aggravated burglary. D'Ambrosio pleads not guilty and trial commences. Espinoza accepts a plea bargain and pleads guilty to manslaughter. He testified against Keenan and D'Ambrosio. DAmbrosio is pronounced guilty. D'Ambrosio is sentenced to death on two counts of aggravated murder counts. He receives additional sentences of 10-25 years in prison each on one count of kidnapping and one count of aggravated burglary. These sentences are set to run consecutively. On direct appeal, DAmbrosios conviction is affirmed by the 8 th District Court of Appeals. DAmbrosios conviction is affirmed by the Supreme Court of Ohio but the case is remanded to the Court of Appeals for an independent review of the sentence. The sentence is affirmed by the Court of Appeals. Kennan's conviction and death sentence are overturned when the Ohio Supreme Court finds that the trial prosecutor, who also prosecuted D'Ambrosio, has committed misconduct. DAmbrosios sentence is affirmed by the Ohio Supreme Court DAmbrosios petition to the US Supreme Court for a Writ of Certiorari is denied. DAmbrosios petition for post-conviction relief is filed in the Court of Common Pleas but dismissed by the court. The dismissal of this petition is affirmed by the Court of Appeals. DAmbrosio files a notice of intent to file a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, a motion for appointment of counsel and a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. The motions are granted and attorneys are appointed. DAmbrosios petition for a writ of habeas corpus is filed. The state files a response on 31 May 2001, with additional follow-up from DAmbrosio on 27 August 2001 and from the state on 11 September 2001.

6 February 1989

21 February 1989 23 February 1989

30 August 1990

25 August 1993

24 November 1993 1993

16 August 1995 1996

27 September 1996

16 March 2000 3 October 2000

30 March 2001

11 September 2001

DAmbrosio files a motion for an evidentiary hearing an d another for leave to conduct discovery. This is followed by a motion to expand the record (on 28 December 2001), to amend the petition (on 18 January 2002) and to conduct further discovery (on 25 March 2002). The Court grants the motion to expand the record, partly grants the motion for discovery and denies the motion for an evidentiary hearing. DAmbrosio files a Murnahan application i.e. an application to reopen his direct appeal. This application is heard but denied by the 8 th District Court of Appeals. DAmbrosios attorneys file a motion to withdraw as counsel. The motion is granted and alternative counsel are appointed DAmbrosio files a new motion to amend the petition, a motion to permit counsel to take possession of evidence to conduct forensic testing and a motion to conduct additional discovery. The first two are granted and the third is partly granted. The District Court orders the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor, the Cuyahoga County Coroner and the Cleveland police to disclose all the evidence they have to D'Ambrosio's lawyers. The defence team finds several items of evidence that were not revealed during the initial 1989 trial. D'Ambrosio subsequently (on 28 April 2003) files a motion for summary judgment and a motion for an evidentiary hearing. The District Court denies D'Ambrosio's motion for summary judgment without prejudice, but grants the motion for an evidentiary hearing. Evidentiary hearing is heard. The District Court determines that the prosecution failed to disclose exculpatory evidence (key items of evidence that were favourable to D'Ambrosio). As a result, the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is granted and the state ordered to either set aside the conviction and death sentence or to commence a retrial within 180 days. The ruling is confirmed in the US Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit. The prosecution subsequently request a retrial, which is set for 2 March 2009. The trial date is pushed back due to extensions caused by the emergence of new evidence at a late stage in the trial process and delays in disclosure of evidence by the prosecution. Espinoza, who previously testified against D'Ambrosio, dies in Chicago. The prosecution do not inform the court or the defence lawyers. The District Court orders the release of D'Ambrosio from custody and the striking out of his conviction. However, the judgement does not prevent the state from potentially reprosecuting D'Ambrosio. The prosecution disclose to D'Ambrosio's lawyers that Espinoza has died. This prompts his lawyers to ask the court to bar any reprosecution on the basis that they would be unable to cross examine Espinoza with new evidence.

2 November 2001

16 April 2002 30 April 2002 19 September 2002

2 December 2002

4 March 2004

19-21 July 2004 24 March 2006

5 June 2008

26 April 2009

27 April 2009

July 2009

3 March 2010

The District Court bars the State of Ohio from any attempt to reprosecute. The State of Ohio appeals the district court ruling. However, this appeal is dismissed by the US Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit on 29 August 2011. The US Supreme Court denies a final state appeal, confirming the exoneration of Joe D'Ambrosio. D'Ambrosio is granted permission by the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas to seek compensation for his wrongful imprisonment. D'Ambrosios lawsuit against Cuyahoga county prosecutors and a police detective is dismissed by a district judge.

November 2010

23 January 2012

11 January 2013

24 January 2013

Chronology produced by Baker & McKenzie in collaboration with Amicus.

Case Summary

JOE D'AMBROSIO
The Crime and Sentencing
The body of Anthony Klann was found in Doan Creek in Cleveland on 24 September 1988. He had been brutally murdered: his throat had been cut and he had stab wounds on his chest. According to the testimonies of D'Ambrosio's co-defendants, Thomas Keenan and Edward Espinoza, the murder occurred during an evening in which Keenan had asked Espinoza and D'Ambrosio to help him recover some drugs from an associate of Klann's named Paul Lewis. Espinoza accepted a plea bargain and testified that Klann was killed after failing to provide the three men with Lewis's whereabouts. He stated that D'Ambrosio killed Klann after Keenan had used D'Ambrosio's knife to slit Klann's throat. On 23 February 1989, D'Ambrosio was found guilty and sentenced to death for aggravated murder with prior calculation and design and aggravated felony murder. Keenan was also convicted and sentenced to death.

Post-Trial Petitions
In March 2001, DAmboise filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the district court, including a claim that the prosecution had failed to disclose exculpatory evidence in violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963). After conducting an evidentiary hearing in July 2004, the district court granted the part of D'Ambrosio's petition relating to the Brady violations and also granted a conditional writ requiring the state to either set aside DAmbrosios convictions and sentences or conduct another trial within 180 days. The US Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit affirmed that decision and on 11 September 2011 the district court issued the writ. The State requested a retrial, which was set for 2 March 2009. Although defence counsel made several requests for evidence from the prosecution, the State failed to respond to these requests until a little more than one week before the retrial was to begin, when the prosecutor notified defence counsel of the existence of additional evidence, including blood samples and soil samples. Defence counsel sought additional time to examine this newly disclosed evidence, prompting the trial court to change the previously scheduled trial date. The State requested an extension of time in which to retry D'Ambrosio and DAmbrosio not only opposed this motion for extension, but asked the Court to bar his reprosecution. On 27 April 2009, the district court filed its opinion and order, denying the State's request and issuing an unconditional writ. The district court also ordered the expungement of DAmbrosios record, but declined to bar his reprosecution. It was subsequently discovered that, on 26 April 2009, Espinoza, the prosecution's key witness had died. However, the state trial court was not informed of this development until July. After D'Ambrosio was made aware of Espinoza's death, on 14 August 2009, he renewed the motion to bar retrial on the grounds that he would not be able to cross-examine Espinoza regarding the new evidence. On 3 March 2010, the District Court struck out the part of the order of 27 April 2009 declining to bar D'Ambrosio's reprosecution and instead barred any further attempt to reprosecute D'Ambrosio. The State appealed this decision, but the district court ruling was upheld.

Life After Death Row

On 23 January 2012, Joe DAmbrosio became the 6th man from Ohio and the 140th in the US to be exonerated from death row. He moved back to North Royalton, Ohio, where he has become a campaigner against the death penalty.

Summary produced by Baker & McKenzie in collaboration with Amicus.