Whether a criminal defendant is denied due process when convicted of two crimes where a guilty verdict on one count logically excludes a finding of guilt on the other

QUESTIONS PRESENTED: In United States v. Powell, 469 U.S. 57 (1984), the Court recognized an exception to the general rule that inconsistent verdicts in a criminal case are not subject to review, in cases, “where a defendant is convicted of two crimes, where a guilty verdict on one count logically excludes a finding of guilt on the other.” Id. at 69, n. 8. While citing an example of a case where two separate guilty verdicts were logically inconsistent, the Court did not provide any guidance on how to determine whether a guilty verdict on one count logically excludes a finding of guilt on the other. In addition, the Court specifically reserved the question of what to do in a case presenting logically inconsistent guilty verdicts Id. This case, therefore, presents the following questions: I. Isacriminal defendant denied his constitutional right to due process of law and trial by jury when he is convicted of two crimes, where a guilty verdict on one count logically excludes a finding of guilt on the other, regardless of whether the statutory elements of those crimes are per se mutually exclusive? II. What remedy should a reviewing court apply if it determines that a criminal defendant’s constitutional right to due process of law and trial by jury were violated because the jury returned guilty verdicts that are logically inconsistent? ii PROCEEDINGS BELOW On April 30, 2024, the Ohio Supreme Court, in State of Ohio v. Richard P. Homrighausen, Case No. 2024-0239, declined jurisdiction of Petitioner’s appeal pursuant to Ohio Supreme Court Rule 7.08(B)(4)(a), constituting a determination that the appeal did not involve a substantial constitutional question and should be dismissed. App. 1-2. On July 9, 2024, the Ohio Supreme Court denied reconsideration of that decision. App. at 3-4. On January 2, 2024, the Court of Appeals for Tuscawaras County, Ohio, Fifth Appellate District in State of Ohio v. Richard P. Homrighausen, No. 2023AP020008, 2024-Ohio-6 (Ohio Ct. App. 5th Dist. 2024) issued its judgment entry and opinion affirming Petitioner’s convictions and sentence. App. at 5-33. On January 17, 2023, the Tuscawaras County, Ohio, Court of Common Pleas issued its Judgment Entry of Conviction and Sentence in State of Ohio v. Richard P. Homrighausen, Stark County Court of Common Pleas Case No. 2022 CR 03 0072. App. at 3440.