YOUNGSTOWN — The 7th District Court of Appeals has denied a request for DNA from bullet shell casings to be tested in an attempt to overturn the convictions of Columbus Jones, 36, who killed Jamail Johnson at a party on Indiana Avenue on Youngstown’s North Side on Feb. 6, 2011.

Jones, who is serving a 90-years-to life-sentence, was convicted of murder, 10 counts of felonious assault and one count of discharging a firearm at or into a habitation, plus gun specifications.

Jones, who is housed in the Lebanon Correctional Institution, will be eligible for parole for the first time Jan. 23, 2101, according to the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction website.

In addition to Jamail E. Johnson, 25, being killed as he tried to diffuse the fight, 10 other people suffered gunshot wounds but survived the 3:30 a.m. shootings. It was estimated 80 to 90 people were in the home.

Hours earlier, much of the crowd had attended a party at the MetroPlex hotel in Liberty hosted by the Kappa fraternity. During the party, the DJ announced an after-party at a home on Indiana Avenue.

COMMON PLEAS RULING

The ruling was in response to Jones asking the appeals court to overturn a decision by Mahoning County Common Pleas Court Judge John Durkin denying Jones’ request in April 2024 that 10 .40-caliber cartridges that were admitted as evidence in Jones’ trial be tested for DNA and the results uploaded to a law enforcement database to potentially “provide additional proof of Mr. Jones’ innocence while simultaneously identifying the true perpetrator.”

Judge Durkin ruled that Jones’ request did not meet a requirement for the testing to be done — that it “was generally not accepted, not yet available or the results were generally not admissible” at the time of the defendant’s trial.

Durkin “found numerous cases that have been reported out of various states and jurisdictions that have addressed expert testimony on DNA transfer evidence and whether that evidence would have affected the outcome of the trial,” Durkin’s ruling stated.

“These cases were decided prior to the trial in his case,” the judge stated. “Thus, the defendant was unable to satisfy all of the requirements under (Ohio law) since DNA testing was generally accepted, was available and the results were generally admissible at the time of trial.”

APPEALS COURT RULING

The appeals court ruling stated that sufficient case law produced by the state and cited by Durkin made it “undisputed that the collection and detection of transfer or touch DNA was generally available at the time” of the Columbus Jones trial.

The appeals court disagreed with Jones’ contention that if the DNA from the shell casings would have excluded Jones as being a DNA contributor, a jury would have found in Jones’ favor at trial because it would have created “sufficient doubt about the evidence against him.”

In other words, Jones was arguing that the DNA evidence, if produced, would have been outcome determinative. But the appeals panel cited “available and admissible evidence” from Jones’ trial as evidence that Jones would have been convicted anyway.

One piece of such evidence was the testimony of Andre Miller, who said he was “100% sure Jones was the man with the gun that night. Miller said he recognized Jones on the news that night but did not realize he identified the wrong person in the photo array because Jones’ hair was different at the time of the shooting from that depicted in his driver’s license photo,” the ruling states.

“Marquel Smith said he drove Jones to and from the party that night. Smith confirmed that Jones had a gun on him, and on the way home, Jones said he ‘aired it out’ and did what he had to do,” the ruling added.

“Durrell Richardson testified and said Jones flashed a gun on the night in question, and Jones later was outside with his gun drawn when the shooting began. Richardson said Jones was one of two people who aimed a gun at him,” the appeals panel noted.

A fourth man’s testimony also was cited, Braylon Rogers, who testified that Jones was carrying a .40-caliber handgun that night and that Jones stated he was going to “air this out” before shooting toward the porch and into the back of the house,” the appeals ruling states.

Furthermore, the state could have argued that any DNA evidence that would have come from the shell casings was not reliable because of the way in which the casings were collected, handled or stored and “could have argued someone else loaded the weapon or Jones was wearing gloves as reasons why his DNA was not found on the casings.”

Judge Carol Robb wrote the opinion, and judges Cheryl Waite and Mark Hanni concurred in the opinion.