A three-judge panel of the Ohio Third District Court of Appeals has upheld a Hamilton County murder conviction, ruling Tuesday that the trial evidence — much of it relying on informant testimony — was sufficient to support the verdict.
The case, stemming from a 2023 homicide in Cincinnati, centered on the prosecution's use of two confidential informants who testified against defendant Marcus Terrell, 34, who was convicted of murder and related charges.
Background
The victim, identified as Darnell Williams, 28, was found dead in a parking garage on Vine Street in downtown Cincinnati in August 2023. Police recovered a single gunshot wound to the chest and initially struggled to identify suspects amid conflicting witness accounts.
Prosecutors built their case primarily around testimony from two informants — one who claimed to have witnessed the shooting and another who provided alleged admissions made by Terrell while in jail. Both informants had pending criminal cases that were potentially affected by their testimony.
Terrell's defense attorneys filed a motion for a new trial, arguing that the informant testimony was unreliable and constituted the bulk of the prosecution's case. The motion cited a 2019 Ohio Supreme Court ruling requiring courts to carefully scrutinize informant testimony, particularly when informants receive benefits in exchange for their cooperation.
The Charges
Terrell was charged with one count of murder in violation of Ohio Revised Code 2903.02(A), one count of felonious assault, and having weapons while under disability. All three charges stemmed from the August 2023 incident.
The prosecution's case relied heavily on the two informants' testimony, along with cell phone location data that placed Terrell's phone in the vicinity of the crime scene around the time of the shooting. No physical evidence, such as DNA or fingerprints, directly linked Terrell to the crime.
In their ruling, the appellate judges wrote that while informant testimony requires careful evaluation, 'the totality of the evidence presented at trial, including the corroborating cell phone location data and the informants' detailed accounts of the events, was sufficient to allow a reasonable jury to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.'
The court also noted that the trial judge properly instructed the jury on how to evaluate informant testimony, telling jurors they could consider whether informants had reasons to lie and whether their accounts were corroborated by other evidence.
Key Takeaways
- Ohio Third District Court of Appeals upheld Marcus Terrell's murder conviction from Hamilton County
- Prosecution's case relied on two confidential informants plus cell phone location data
- Defense argued informant testimony was unreliable and insufficient for conviction
- Appellate court found trial evidence sufficient despite reliance on informants
- Cell phone data placed defendant's phone near crime scene at time of shooting
- Trial judge properly instructed jury on evaluating informant testimony, court ruled
What's Next
Terrell's attorneys have 30 days to petition the Ohio Supreme Court for review of the appellate decision. If no petition is filed, the conviction stands and sentencing will proceed according to the original trial court judgment.
The Hamilton County Prosecutor's Office declined to comment on the ruling. Defense attorneys could not be reached for immediate response.
The case is expected to remain a reference point in Ohio criminal law regarding the sufficiency of informant-based evidence in murder prosecutions.