"O’NEILL, J., concurs in part and dissents in part, for the reasons set forth
in his dissenting opinion in State v. Wogenstahl, 134 Ohio St.3d 1437."
-----------------------
Having family history in Ohio, Judge O'Neill, a true paragon of partiality,
really disgusts me.
The sole dissent is from a justice who should recuse himself from every death penalty case, since he opposes every death penalty sentence categorically
on (im)moral grounds. How is he not impeached or at least forced to recuse?

He is irreperably biased, so that impartial justice is impossible with him,
yet he contributes to such decisions as an activist rather than jurist.
-----------------------
O'NEILL, J., dissents.
O'NEILL, J., dissenting.
{¶ 1} "I would deny the state's motion to set an execution date, and I therefore dissent from the order issued by this court. If there exists a case that is appropriate for the imposition of the death sentence, this case clearly qualifies. ..

{¶ 2} "Without expressing an opinion as to appellant's guilt or innocence, however, I would hold that capital punishment violates the 8th Amendment to the Constitution of the US and Article I, Section 9 of the Ohio Constitution. The death penalty is inherently both cruel and unusual and therefore is unconstitutional.

{¶ 3} "Capital punishment dates back to the days when decapitations, hangings, and brandings were also the norm. Surely, our society has evolved since those barbaric days. The United States is one of just a few civilized countries that still permit
state executions.

Guilt is not relevant, but Mexican public opinion is.
Machiavellian perverter of justice.
He plagues Ohio.