Michael Buehner served 12 years of an 18-to-life prison sentence for murder before finding evidence that would support his innocence claim 鈥� evidence that Cuyahoga County prosecutors in Ohio withheld from him and his attorneys.
He lost two appeals and was starting to lose hope when, one day, a friend visited him in prison, armed with a stack of police reports.
鈥溾�榊ou still have hope,鈥欌�� he remembers his friend telling him. 鈥溾�橸ou didn鈥檛 do this.鈥欌��
The reports, obtained by Buehner鈥檚 friend through a public records request, detailed eyewitness accounts suggesting a Black man 鈥� not a white man, like Buehner 鈥� had shot a drug dealer. Buehner鈥檚 attorneys had asked prosecutors to share evidence like this several times before his trial. They never did.
The discovery spurred a pair of appeals that ended in a 2021 ruling against the Cuyahoga County prosecutor鈥檚 office in Cleveland for failing to disclose evidence that could have helped Buehner at trial. By the time the appellate court ordered a new trial, he鈥檇 spent nearly two decades behind bars.
Buehner is among a rare group of defendants in Ohio from 2017 to 2021 whose criminal trials were reversed after alleging that county prosecutors across the state had withheld police reports, witness statements and other evidence that could have favored their defense, an investigation by Columbia Journalism Investigations, Ideastream Public Media and The Ohio Newsroom found.
Appellate judges ruled that four defendants, including Buehner, had trials so tainted by misconduct that they warranted new trials. While the numbers seem small, legal experts say these cases 鈥� about one per year over five years 鈥� likely represent a fraction of their actual occurrence. And all but one of these cases occurred in Cuyahoga County, the second most populous county in the state behind Franklin County.
The misconduct falls under a constitutional standard established 60 years ago by the U.S. Supreme Court case, 鈥淏rady v. Maryland.鈥� It requires prosecutors to hand over evidence that could help a person鈥檚 defense. When they flout this standard, it is a Brady violation 鈥� the most egregious form of prosecutorial misconduct, experts said. The violations are extremely rare and Brady-related misconduct is difficult to prove, but when judges find that it has occurred, the result is often a new trial.
CJI and its partners examined hundreds of state appellate decisions to uncover claims of prosecutorial misconduct in Ohio, including Brady violations; reviewed hundreds of other court documents, police files and hearing transcripts to track misconduct cases through the criminal justice system; and interviewed more than 100 legal scholars, defense attorneys, judges, defendants and their families, as well as nearly three dozen former and current assistant county prosecutors throughout the state.
of Ohio appellate cases alleging prosecutors withheld evidence that could have favored defendants, and is a window into what many experts consider a largely invisible national problem.
Legal scholars agree that it鈥檚 difficult to know the true extent of Brady-related misconduct in Ohio and beyond 鈥� it is, by its nature, hidden. What misconduct is uncovered is likely the tip of the iceberg, according to Brandon Garrett, a professor at Duke Law School who studies Brady claims.
In set to be released in 2024, Garrett found prosecutors had failed to turn over evidence important enough to warrant a new trial in 10% of roughly 800 cases alleging Brady violations nationwide from 2015 to 2019.
鈥淲e were surprised that 鈥he court really did find merit to the claims,鈥� he said, adding that cases involving Brady violations spanned the nation.
Among our findings:
- Twenty-five of the 102 appeals that Ohio courts ruled on that alleged prosecutors had withheld favorable evidence during this five-year period were from Cuyahoga County.
- Three of the four cases in which a court found prosecutors had withheld evidence that could clear a defendant were from Cuyahoga. Even when prosecutors had exculpatory evidence, they sometimes resisted disclosing it.
- Prosecuting attorneys found responsible for withholding evidence faced few, if any, consequences. In fact, some advanced in their careers, often overseeing major trials or moving into much-sought after jobs with the U.S. attorney鈥檚 office or the state attorney general鈥檚 office. At least one became a judge.
- Defendants who were put behind bars have spent years 鈥� sometimes decades 鈥� trying to prove their civil rights were violated.
Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Michael O鈥橫alley refused three requests for an interview for this story. First elected in 2016, O鈥橫alley did not head the county prosecutor鈥檚 office during Buehner鈥檚 original criminal trial.
Kristen Sobieski, who oversees the appellate unit for the Cuyahoga County prosecutor鈥檚 office, acknowledged that the office has seen convictions reversed for violating the Brady standard. But she said that no prosecuting attorney involved in those cases intentionally concealed evidence.
鈥淚 have not once in my entire career in this office ever had an instance where one of our prosecutors with any sort of willfulness or intent took something to be exculpatory or mitigating and purposely did not disclose it,鈥� said Sobieski, a 21-year veteran of the office.
Asked about CJI鈥檚 analysis showing a pattern of Brady violations there, Sobieski disputed the judges鈥� findings and blamed high caseloads and a 鈥渟taggering鈥� volume of information for prosecutors鈥� failures to turn over evidence.
鈥淚t鈥檚 not perfect,鈥� she said. 鈥淏ut this isn鈥檛 alarming to me.鈥�
There were around 1,200 criminal trials in Cuyahoga County between 2017 and 2021, and at least 25 appeals involving a Brady-related claim, CJI鈥檚 analysis shows.
When Brady violations are found to have merit, rarely are prosecutors disciplined, Garrett said.
鈥淭here鈥檚 not a lot of prosecutorial accountability coming out of these opinions, even when it reaches the level of an outright violation,鈥� Garrett said.
Much like CJI鈥檚 analysis, the Duke study found more Brady allegations and violations in Cuyahoga than any other Ohio county, a finding Garrett called 鈥渟urprising鈥� and 鈥渞eally unusual鈥� given that these claims were raised in similarly sized jurisdictions in the state.
鈥淲hen a pattern like that comes to light, there should be consequences,鈥� he said. 鈥淭here should be an investigation of the office and there should be disciplinary action and review. . . . Just like there鈥檚 an automatic inquiry when police use deadly force.鈥�
鈥楶rosecution discretion is almost total鈥�
Prosecutors wield immense power in the criminal justice system. They decide who to charge with crimes, what punishment to seek and what evidence to use at trial.
鈥淧rosecution discretion is almost total,鈥� said Bennett Gershman, a Pace University law professor and former prosecutor who has studied misconduct in the profession.
They are responsible for knowing all evidence in the state鈥檚 possession, including evidence held by the police, and turning over anything they consider favorable to the defense.
Most states have adopted rules for criminal cases that govern what information prosecutors must disclose before trial. In 24 states, prosecutors must automatically produce certain evidence to the defense. Ten other states, including Ohio, require prosecutors to divulge it upon request.
Some counties in Ohio do more than the state鈥檚 rule requires: The Montgomery County prosecutor鈥檚 office, which encompasses Dayton, produces certain evidence without a defense request. The office encourages its prosecuting attorneys to work with police to collect evidence and to review cases with detectives to ensure prosecutors have gathered it all.
In Cuyahoga County, by contrast, the prosecutor鈥檚 office does the bare minimum. Its policy has assistant county prosecutors turn over certain evidence only when requested. Even then, it鈥檚 up to individual prosecuting attorneys and their supervisors. The office has no guidelines for ensuring full disclosure of law enforcement records.
Defendants face a high bar to prove that a prosecutor wrongfully withheld evidence. To make a successful Brady claim, they must uncover previously undisclosed evidence after trial and show it would have changed the guilty verdict. Judges must hold a hearing to examine the new evidence and decide whether it warrants a new trial.
Just because judges don鈥檛 confirm misconduct doesn鈥檛 mean a defendant鈥檚 claims are baseless, CJI鈥檚 data shows. In 11 of 97 appeals that did not result in Brady violations, Ohio appellate courts found the state had withheld or destroyed evidence. But they ruled it wasn鈥檛 important enough to reverse the case.
In the case of Hector Alvarado, who was convicted of murder for fatally stabbing a woman at a bar on New Year鈥檚 Day a decade ago, appellate judges in Lucas County found in 2017 there was no Brady-related misconduct. Three years later in 2020, a federal court ordered the state courts to consider undisclosed evidence, including a witness affidavit revealing that the prosecutor had coached his testimony against Alvarado. Before his case was retried, Alvarado took a plea deal in 2022 that did not require a guilty admission 鈥� a condition of most pleas 鈥� and was released from prison. He served nine years of a 15-to-life sentence.
The appeals process can take years 鈥� the Duke study found a successful Brady claim takes, on average, a decade to be resolved. And that鈥檚 only if a defendant finds out about the undisclosed evidence in the first place.
Case Western Reserve University School of Law professor Michael Benza, an expert in appellate law who has handled capital cases, said if defendants don鈥檛 have the resources, it鈥檚 nearly impossible to determine whether prosecutors withheld evidence. 鈥淭he reality is that defendants will never 鈥� and I don鈥檛 use that word lightly 鈥� be able to find their Brady material if they are inside and don鈥檛 have outside help.鈥�
鈥榊ou just deemed it non-exculpatory?鈥�
Thirteen years before Buehner would need help uncovering his Brady material, he was a third-generation painter living what he calls the American dream 鈥� he had a house, a family and a bridge-painting job that took him around the country. He loved the thrill of walking bridge beams.
鈥淭hat was so peaceful,鈥� he said. 鈥淚t sucks when the wind blows, though. I鈥檒l tell you that.鈥�
He was shocked to find himself in a Cleveland courtroom in January 2002, he said, accused of a murder that took place on the night he was celebrating his grandmother鈥檚 61st birthday.
Court records show Buehner was charged in the shooting death of Jerry Saunders based on the testimony of two witnesses 鈥� one of whom was selling drugs with Saunders at the time. The first witness failed to identify Buehner from a photo array of suspects, but later picked him out of a lineup.
The second witness, accused of being an accomplice, pinned the shooting on Buehner and, in a plea deal, agreed to testify against him.
The same month that he first walked into court, Buehner鈥檚 attorneys asked prosecutors to share evidence that could help prepare his defense.
This was before the state changed its rule requiring prosecutors to hand over copies of specific types of evidence upon request. At the time, the Cuyahoga prosecutor鈥檚 office policy had assistant county prosecutors sit in a room with defense attorneys before trial and read out loud defendant statements, witness names and any exculpatory evidence. They didn鈥檛 provide copies of those records; instead, defense attorneys had to take notes.
There was no formal system for tracking this information, according to court records, interviews and videos of office training sessions obtained by CJI and its partners.
Longtime Assistant County Prosecutor T. Allan Regas described the former policy in a video recording of a 2016 Brady compliance training. 鈥淲e would look at a file and say, 鈥榃hat do I have to give up? I don鈥檛 have to give this up,鈥欌�� he said. 鈥淭his isn鈥檛 gonna change the outcome.鈥欌��
Cuyahoga County鈥檚 prosecutor鈥檚 office declined to comment on the policies of previous administrations.
Buehner鈥檚 attorneys asked prosecutors at least four times to turn over favorable evidence 鈥� including the same reports that Buehner鈥檚 friend would find through a records request years later. Each time, then-Cuyahoga County Assistant Prosecutor Richard Bombik either told the court he had no exculpatory materials or argued the information wasn鈥檛 relevant.
But records suggest prosecutors knew about some evidence that contradicted their case. In an April 2002 memo 鈥� penned two months before trial 鈥� Bombik and fellow prosecutor Christopher Keim referenced the witness testimony later found exculpatory: One eyewitness, they noted in this memo, 鈥渟tates there were two black males in the truck (despite both co-defendants being white).鈥�
Keim, who left the office in July 2002 for private practice, declined to comment. Bombik retired in 2012 after three decades as an assistant county prosecutor. In an email, he said he always read his entire case file to defense attorneys, no matter how long it took.
鈥淚 took my responsibilities as a prosecuting attorney seriously, which included my obligation to disclose exculpatory information in every case I handled,鈥� Bombik wrote in a March 2023 email.
In 2019, five years after Buehner had uncovered the withheld evidence, Keim and Bombik testified about their discovery practices at a hearing on whether Buehner should get a new trial.
On the stand, Keim agreed prosecutors would 鈥渙bviously鈥� share with the defense information indicating the shooter was a different race than the defendant.
In his testimony, Bombik cited the office鈥檚 then-policy on discovery. 鈥淚 thought I was pretty liberal, as far as a prosecutor goes, with the information I shared,鈥� he said.
Buehner鈥檚 defense attorney brought up a concealed statement that the appellate court said 鈥渄eprived Buehner of his right to due process,鈥� and asked Bombik whether he鈥檇 deemed the withheld eyewitness testimony non exculpatory.
鈥淚t just never entered my mind, that one,鈥� Bombik replied.
In his email statement, Bombik disputed that the evidence was undisclosed, instead blaming Buehner鈥檚 original lead defense attorney, who lost his trial notes after he had moved his office around 2014. That attorney declined to comment, but testified in a 2019 hearing that he would have used the exculpatory material at trial had it been provided to him.
For Buehner, the withheld evidence came at a steep price. He, like the appellate judges, believes it would have tipped the case in his favor. 鈥淗aving that additional evidence would have created that much more doubt,鈥� he said.
鈥楽omebody finally believed me鈥�
Michael Sutton and Kenny Phillips also suffered when prosecutors failed to disclose evidence. The Cleveland men were cleared last year after they had discovered undisclosed eyewitness testimony contradicting what prosecutors presented at trial. The pair were convicted in 2007 of attempted murder charges 鈥� and Phillips of an additional shooting-at-a-police-officer charge 鈥� stemming from a drive-by shooting. Combined, they received prison sentences of nearly 140 years: 46 and a half years for Sutton; 92 for Phillips. Both men are Black.
The incident derailed the then-teenagers from promising futures: Sutton was headed to the University of Akron on a full scholarship before his arrest; Phillips had a job at Cleveland鈥檚 Major League Baseball stadium.
鈥淲e was just kids ready to come into adulthood,鈥� Sutton said.
Their convictions were based on the testimony of two Cleveland police officers who said they saw shots fired from Sutton鈥檚 1987 Chevrolet into a black Lincoln. One officer testified that, during a subsequent foot chase, two people fired shots at him.
During opening statements at trial, then-Cuyahoga County Assistant Prosecutor Christopher Wagner mentioned two additional patrolmen on the scene that night. But Wagner didn鈥檛 ask the pair to corroborate the incriminating police testimony.
What wasn鈥檛 revealed at trial 鈥� and what prosecutors didn鈥檛 disclose to defense attorneys 鈥� was that these patrolmen had a different version of events. According to affidavits they would sign eight years later, the patrolmen, who were partners, said they never saw shots fired from Sutton鈥檚 car, nor did they hear any shots fired during the foot pursuit.
No longer on the Cleveland force, one of the patrolmen, Gregory Jones, later went to prison for rape. After seeing a news segment about Jones鈥� rape case, Sutton got in touch with him. Jones told the two men what he had witnessed that night and his eventual testimony prompted the appeal.
鈥淚 saw the time that they got. I was like, 鈥榃ow,鈥欌�� Jones said in an interview for this story.
Before Sutton and Phillips went to trial, Jones said he and his then-partner told the lead detective on the case that they didn鈥檛 hear any shots fired at police officers.
The detective, Jones said, was 鈥済oing to talk to the prosecutor,鈥� and promised to return.
He did, and dismissed the patrolmen, Jones said. The detective now works for Olmsted Falls, a Cleveland suburb. He did not respond to requests for an interview.
Cuyahoga County Assistant Prosecutor Gregg Paul, who was not involved in the first trial and spoke with the detective while handling the Sutton and Phillips retrial years later, in September 2022, said that the detective had no recollection of a meeting with Jones.
Paul said he didn鈥檛 try to contact Jones himself. 鈥淔rankly, I don鈥檛 believe Gregory Jones,鈥� Paul said.
Even if police hide evidence from prosecutors, the courts hold prosecutors responsible for failing to produce it 鈥� a legal duty emphasized during the Cuyahoga office training on Brady compliance.
鈥淚 know it鈥檚 like pulling teeth,鈥� said Regas at the 2016 session, explaining that prosecutors must exercise due diligence when collecting information from detectives. 鈥淏ut you have to pull those teeth and make sure that you know everything the police know.鈥�
Wagner, now a trial court judge in Cincinnati, said through an attorney that he wasn鈥檛 responsible for pre-trial discovery materials and didn鈥檛 join the Sutton and Phillips case until shortly before trial. He declined to be interviewed.
Former Cuyahoga County Assistant Prosecutor Gayle Williams-Byers fielded discovery requests for Sutton鈥檚 and Phillips鈥� original trial. She said the first and second chair prosecutors handling the case were responsible for turning over exculpatory material to the defense. Wagner was the lead prosecutor.
鈥淚t doesn鈥檛 matter what point you inherit the case, you inherit it with the continued obligation to comply with discovery,鈥� said Williams-Byers, who went on to be a municipal judge in a Cleveland suburb.
By 2015, Sutton and Phillips had served eight years in prison when Jones and his then-partner signed their affidavits, sparking an appeal that would result in a new trial. The conflicting police testimony constituted a Brady violation, the appellate panel found, and threw the original verdicts into doubt.
O鈥橫alley, then-Cuyahoga County鈥檚 newly elected prosecutor, did not head the office during Sutton鈥檚 and Phillips鈥� original criminal trial. But he defended the original conviction in this misconduct case and pursued a retrial, even after the appellate judges had ruled the withheld evidence undermined the guilty verdict so severely it prompted a reversal.
Sobieski, the appeals division supervisor, said she questioned the Brady violation rulings that hinged on witnesses coming forward after trial in this and other cases.
鈥淸If] they were on the state鈥檚 witness list at the time of trial, or they even testified at a first trial, how can it possibly be construed as a state withholding or secreting away evidence?鈥� she said.
Sutton and Phillips may see things differently. In September 2022, after serving 15 years in prison, a second jury acquitted the two men. After the judge read the 鈥渘ot guilty鈥� verdict, Phillips shouted: 鈥淪omebody finally believed me!鈥�
鈥榊ou should have did your due diligence鈥�
Both the Sutton and Phillips and Buehner cases happened before 2010, the year Ohio amended the rules for trying criminal cases, including expanding access to police reports, witness statements and other law enforcement records.
Defense attorneys agree the rule has made it easier to obtain evidence before trial. But at least one case suggests it hasn鈥檛 protected defendants from Cuyahoga assistant county prosecutors鈥� failure to disclose favorable evidence.
In August 2017, Jermael Burton was arrested for a shooting incident at an East Cleveland house where Burton told police he lived. After the victim identified Burton as the shooter, prosecutors used his mail and filled prescription bottles to link him to weapons and drugs that police had found there. Burton was charged with attempted murder, felonious assault and drug possession, among other things.
Six months later, an East Cleveland detective testified at the trial that he discovered the items bearing Burton鈥檚 name in the house. But Burton said that those items were in his car鈥檚 glove box before the shooting. He said he saw two officers search his Chevrolet Cruze after his arrest, and his car had been towed to a police lot that night.
Burton produced two documents that he believed would back his claim: a private tow company receipt that named 鈥淓CPD鈥� as the location, and a dispatch call log from the incident night putting the tow truck on the scene. The receipt belonged to Burton. And prosecutors gave his attorney the log before trial, he said. But the log didn鈥檛 include any notation that Burton鈥檚 car was actually towed.
Cuyahoga County Assistant Prosecutor Brad Meyer cast doubt on Burton鈥檚 testimony. 鈥淭he only person who said that anyone went into the defendant鈥檚 car is the defendant, and his evidence to back it up didn鈥檛 match his story 鈥� his fairytale,鈥� he said in closing arguments.
The jury acquitted Burton, who is Black, of the attempted murder and felonious assault charges but found him guilty of drug-related and other charges. He was sentenced to 11 years in prison.
After his trial, Burton鈥檚 former girlfriend requested and obtained East Cleveland police records. Among them was another tow document, previously undisclosed. It showed Burton鈥檚 car had, in fact, been hauled to a department yard on the incident night, just as he鈥檇 testified. Three officers were named on the document 鈥� including the detective who, at trial, had denied knowing whether Burton鈥檚 car had been towed.
Under the state鈥檚 2010 rule, prosecutors were required to turn over police records about the towing of Burton鈥檚 car.
In March 2021, an appellate court ruled the uncovered police tow document could be exculpatory and ordered a hearing to determine whether Burton should get a new trial.
The Cuyahoga prosecutor鈥檚 office later reached a deal to reduce Burton鈥檚 prison term to four years, allowing him to be released in late December 2021. In an interview, Meyer said the office agreed to the deal because it鈥檇 become clear the court would have granted Burton a new trial.
Meyer acknowledged that the withheld tow document at the center of Burton鈥檚 appeal 鈥渨as clearly known to somebody at East Cleveland.鈥� But prosecutors turned over every piece of evidence known to them, he said, and he would have investigated if he鈥檇 been alerted to the towing issue before trial.
For Burton, it all seems too little, too late. He faulted the Cuyahoga prosecutor鈥檚 office for not collecting and sharing all the tow documents, even if the East Cleveland Police Department didn鈥檛 produce them.
鈥淎s a prosecutor, you should have did your due diligence,鈥� Burton said.
Not one prosecutor punished
Elected county prosecutors can take internal action 鈥� everything from reprimanding to suspending and firing subordinates involved in Brady-related misconduct. In Cuyahoga County, the assistant prosecutors who withheld favorable evidence have faced no such consequences.
CJI and its partners obtained the personnel files of six assistant county prosecutors whose cases ended in Brady violations from 2017 to 2021. Only two 鈥� Meyer and James Gallagher, who worked on the Burton case 鈥� were still employed by the Cuyahoga prosecutor鈥檚 office when the appeals court affirmed the misconduct. Their files didn鈥檛 mention Burton鈥檚 case or the Brady violation. Meyer said he鈥檚 never been disciplined and his office hasn鈥檛 required him to undergo additional training on Brady compliance.
None of the six files contained any written or verbal reprimand about the handling of case evidence.
Sobieski suggested the Cuyahoga prosecutor鈥檚 office would discipline an employee who intentionally withheld information, although she said she鈥檚 never encountered such behavior.
鈥淭hose instances where we can learn,鈥� she said, 鈥渨e absolutely take advantage of those and try to make all of our prosecutors better and more aware.鈥�
Nine former assistant county prosecutors said they don鈥檛 recall the prosecutor鈥檚 office punishing or re-training employees for Brady violations and similar discovery mistakes. The office didn鈥檛 track and review misconduct claims and rulings in any systematic way, they said.
Instead, the prosecutors鈥� careers appear to have been unaffected. Records show personnel files full of positive evaluations and letters penned by supervisors and victims鈥� families congratulating them on big trial wins. Some won accolades: Two years after Michael Buehner was convicted, Bombik received an award for 鈥渢enacity, professionalism, and integrity.鈥� The award was named after Carmen Marino, an assistant prosecutor from 1972 to 2002, whose name was later stripped from the award after he was linked to Brady-related misconduct in myriad cases.
Shortly after his conviction, Burton filed a misconduct complaint against Meyer with the state鈥檚 Office of Disciplinary Counsel, he said, alleging that Meyer had misrepresented the tow documents to the jury.
By October 2018, the disciplinary counsel鈥檚 office had informed him it had closed his complaint.
鈥淧rosecutorial misconduct is a claim that must be raised on appeal,鈥� the office wrote in the Oct. 22 letter. It suggested Burton send a certified copy of a judicial finding of wrongdoing. 鈥淲e will reopen our investigation at that time.鈥�
Burton never re-filed his complaint because, he said, he doubted that the appeals court decision would satisfy the disciplinary counsel.
鈥淚鈥檓 sorry he feels that way,鈥� Meyer said.
Experts view this lack of accountability as the primary reason Brady misconduct persists. Ellen Yaroshefsky, a legal ethics professor at Hofstra University鈥檚 Maurice A. Deane School of Law in New York, has studied the policies that can contribute to Brady violations at prosecutors鈥� offices nationwide. She believes prosecutors鈥� offices have no will to discipline their own, and state disciplinary bodies fail to take Brady misconduct seriously.
鈥淚f the system were serious about ensuring that innocent people didn鈥檛 get convicted . . . they would change the system and have some consequences,鈥� Yaroshefksy said.
鈥楬e missed all that鈥�
For those on the receiving end, the consequences have been devastating.
Burton lost out on his daughter鈥檚 early years 鈥� she was nine months old when he went to prison. At first, his former partner brought their daughter to visit him twice a month. But those visits ceased during the COVID-19 pandemic. Upon his release, Burton picked up his daughter for the first time in almost two years. Then four years old, she clung to her mother as if he were a stranger, said Burton, who describes the moment as 鈥渟our and sweet.鈥�
The many years that Sutton and Phillips spent in prison have left both traumatized. Sutton often wakes up in a sweat, he said, 鈥渕y t-shirt 鈥� soaking wet.鈥� When Phillips sees a police car, he often pulls into the closest driveway and waits for it to pass. He鈥檚 knocked on people鈥檚 doors in order to avoid the police, he said. 鈥淭hat鈥檚 how terrified I be sometimes.鈥�
The men hope to tell their story through speaking events at Ohio schools, prisons and churches. In early 2023, Sutton shared his experiences with students from the University of Akron, which has offered him and Phillips full-tuition scholarships. Touched by the gesture, Sutton said he hopes to finally be able to attend.
In July, Buehner returned to the same courthouse where his original trial had played out more than two decades earlier. This time, at his retrial, one of the witnesses whose statements had come to light through the 2014 public records request took the stand. She described the shooter as a Black man. It took the jury three hours of deliberation to acquit Buehner of murder and involuntary manslaughter charges.
After the 鈥渘ot guilty鈥� verdict was read, Buehner wiped away tears.
For his family, the damage caused by the misconduct in his case already was done. As his years in prison passed, the losses outside his cell had mounted: his mother died; his fianc茅 left; and his two young sons grew up. He missed out on their childhood milestones, from playing tee ball to graduating high school.
鈥淗e missed all that,鈥� said Buehner鈥檚 stepmother, Patricia. 鈥淵ou can never get it back.鈥�
His father, Robert, whose own father was a Cuyahoga County sheriff鈥檚 deputy for decades, mourns another loss: his family鈥檚 faith in the criminal justice system.
鈥淭hey went so far beyond to put him in there in the first place,鈥� Robert Buehner said of the prosecutors involved in his son鈥檚 case. 鈥淎re they going to come up with something else to take him away again? That鈥檚 always gonna be in the back of my head.鈥�
This story is a collaboration from NPR鈥檚 Station Investigations Team, which supports local investigative journalism; Columbia Journalism Investigations, an investigative reporting unit at the Columbia Journalism School in New York; and NPR member station Ideastream Public Media.
Matthew Richmond is a reporter at Ideastream Public Media. Jake Kincaid and Cameron Oakes reported this story as fellows for CJI. CJI fellows Gabriela Alcalde and Patricia Martinez Sastre, CJI research assistants Frances Howe and Jake Millman, and NPR senior producer Robert Benincasa and Roy W. Howard fellow Tirzah Christopher contributed to the data analysis. The Ohio Newsroom, a collaboration among Ohio public radio stations, provided editing and other support.
This story was supported by the Fund for Investigative Journalism.