CHILLICOTHE — Special prosecutors who handled the criminal case against former Hocking County Sheriff’s Chief Deputy Caleb Moritz have asked a judge to reject two post-trial defense motions that, if approved, would effectively overturn the guilty verdict a jury delivered last month.
After Moritz was found guilty of felony charges including witness intimidation, theft, forgery, corrupting another with drugs, and unlawful transaction in weapons, his attorneys filed a motion asking Judge Steven Beathard to dismiss all charges and grant a new trial, citing alleged misconduct by two special prosecutors from the Ohio Attorney General’s Office.
Defense attorneys Paul Scarsella and Olivia Rancour also submitted a second motion requesting Moritz’s acquittal on the charges of corrupting another with drugs and witness intimidation, arguing that the prosecution failed to prove all required elements of those charges during the trial.
In a response filed Thursday, special prosecutors Brad Tammaro and Cynthia Ellison argued that the dismissal motion is “based upon a misstatement of facts, a lack of knowledge, and is contrary to law.”
Caleb Moritz
Moritz’s attorneys specifically claim the prosecution engaged in misconduct by failing to disclose that a key state witness faced a criminal indictment at the time of her testimony. They argue that, had they known, they could have used that information to “probe her motives, expose potential bias, and raise questions regarding her credibility.”
Scarsella and Rancour also allege another instance of misconduct, claiming Ellison intimidated a defense witness into leaving the courthouse before testifying. They say Ellison stood near the witness in the hallway and spoke loudly on her phone about whether the witness had any warrants or pending charges — which she did.
Tammaro and Ellison deny both allegations. Regarding the indicted state witness, they state that Moritz’s attorneys have offered no evidence showing the prosecutors knew about the indictment. They add that the witness herself was unaware of it at the time she testified.
As for the defense witness who allegedly left after overhearing Ellison’s call, the prosecutors say the defense misrepresented the situation. They cite a sworn affidavit from another witness present in the hallway, who stated Ellison was not speaking loudly. “Even though I was very close to her I could not hear what she was saying on the phone as she was talking with her hand over her mouth and phone shielding her discussion,” the affidavit states.
The prosecutors further argue that even if the witness had testified, her expected statements — as described by the defense — were irrelevant to determining whether Moritz committed the crimes for which he was convicted.
They also note that if her testimony had been critical, the defense could have requested a warrant to bring her back or asked for a continuance to locate her and secure her testimony.
Additionally, the prosecutors asked Judge Beathard to deny the defense motions seeking acquittal on specific charges, maintaining that the state sufficiently proved every element of the offenses.
Moritz is scheduled for sentencing on May 1.
Leave a Reply