Man and woman conspire to kill woman's former husband, which they accomplish. Both are sentenced to death. Yikes! Turns out the judge (ex parte) tasked the prosecutor with drafting the sentencing opinion with the aid of the judge's notes. (The judge and prosecutor are publicly reprimanded.) The condemned man gets resentenced—to death by the same judge who refused to consider new mitigating evidence and in an opinion that is almost identical to the original. Sixth Circuit: Habeas granted. The judge was unconstitutionally biased. He also should've considered all relevant mitigating evidence. (For those keeping count, that's the second Sixth Circuit habeas grant of an Ohio conviction in as many weeks.)
The case is Jackson v. Cool, No. 21-3207 (6th Cir. Aug. 6, 2024).