Appeals court rejects Danny Lee Hill claim of intellectual disability
Trumbull prosecutor hails decision, cites growing support for death penalty
Trending
The Ohio 11th District Court, in a ruling released today, affirmed the decision of a visiting judge in denying death row inmate Danny Lee Hill's bid to file a second postconviction relief petition challenging his death sentence that again claimed he was intellectually disabled, a term that replaced "mentally retarded."
In a decision written by 11th District Judge John J. Eklund: "(State law) is clear. A trial court is without authority to consider a second or successive petition for post-conviction relief unless there are facts on which the petitioner (Hill) must rely and which the petitioner was unavoidably prevented from discovering, or the U.S. Supreme Court has created a new federal or state right that applies retroactively. Neither circumstance adheres in this case based on the record before us."
Trumbull County Prosecutor Dennis Watkins applauded this latest decision, also noting the "long line" of federal and state courts which have denied Hill's attempt to escape execution. Watkins stated that Hill's victims - Miriam Fife and family - will not need to go back to court and listen to more experts." He added: "This should end the litigation on Hill's alleged low-IQ defense."
The (11th District's) decision comes on the heels of a new Pew Research survey showing the support of the death penalty is growing," Watkins said
noting the July 6-12, 2026, Pew poll shows 66 percent of Americans now favor the death penalty for people convicted of murder.
The Ohio Supreme Court on April 23, 2026, remanded the case, which was argued by the former Ohio Chief Deputy Solicitor General, and now Federal District Court Judge Michael Hendershot, back to the 11th District court. The unanimous 11th District court, led by Judge Eklund and joined by Judges Matt Lynch and Robert J. Patton affirmed visiting Judge Patricia Cosgrove's 2023 decision denying Hill's petition for relief because it was "untimely and successive." The ruling stated there were no new facts that Hill was intellectually disabled, only a new opinion, advanced by the federal public defender's office, based upon the old facts.
In her decision, Judge Cosgrove, in noting the delays in the case caused by the excessive appeals made by Hill, found that the trial evidence overwhelmingly supported Hill's conviction for aggravated murder with the death penalty specification. Cosgrove also noted that the issue of intellectual disability "has been examined and re-examined... in several postconviction petitions and motions for a new trial. The evidence of Hill's behavior before the age of 18 is not new evidence," Cosgrove wrote in her 2023 decision.
Hill's argument is based on the U.S. Supreme Court 2002 decision in the case of Atkins vs. Virginia that determined the Eighth Amendment's bar against cruel and unusual punishment prohibits the imposition of the death penalty for "mentally retarded" persons.
Read more details on this story in Tuesday’s Tribune Chronicle.