PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "One of the experts called to testify by prosecutors was a doctor who heads the hospital’s Mayerson Center, which consults in child abuse cases. Dr. Kathi Makoroff testified that Jayce’s injuries were consistent with child abuse. The appeals court said Makoroff testified despite not having submitted an expert report. Ohio law requires expert witnesses to first prepare a written report summarizing their conclusions or opinion. The purpose of the rule is “to prevent unfair surprise,” the opinion says, and allow a defendant an opportunity to challenge an expert’s findings. The Enquirer reports Mounts’ attorney’s “failure to object to this testimony, which introduced a previously undisclosed expert opinion on a central issue in the case,” the opinion says, “fell below an objective standard of reasonable representation and therefore constituted deficient performance.”
————————————————————
PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: Differing conclusions: The appeals court’s opinion also said Guinan did not sufficiently challenge the prosecution’s objection to one of his expert witnesses. A critical issue in the trial was when Jayce suffered the skull fracture and brain bleeding – something that, according to the opinion, could only be determined by examining slides of brain tissue through a microscope. A forensic neuropathologist, Dr. Andrea Wiens, initially hired by prosecutors but who ended up being a defense witness, testified that Jayce’s skull fracture happened at least a few weeks before he died and that there was evidence it was healing. That conclusion was based upon Wiens reviewing a “recut” slide supplied by another witness. According to the opinion, prosecutors attacked her credibility based mainly on the assumption that she had not examined the original slide."
———————————————————
PASSAGE THREE OF THE DAY: "During a break in the trial, Wiens reviewed the original slide and determined that it did not change her opinion. But prosecutors objected to her testifying about that because the original slide was not part of her expert report. During a sidebar, according to the opinion, the judge suggested to Guinan that he amend the pathologist’s report, but Guinan instead decided to “abandon the entire line of questioning.” The appeals court said the decision to abandon the testimony about the slides “fell below an objective standard of reasonableness.” The court said that if Mounts’ first appellate attorney had raised ineffective assistance of counsel in the initial appeal, it would have overturned the conviction."
------------------------------------------------
STORY: "Appeals court overturns murder conviction in infant’s death," by Courts Reporter Kevin Grasha, published by The Cincinnati Enquirer, on April 22, 2026.
GIST: "A state appeals court has thrown out the murder conviction of a Sharonville man who is serving 15 years to life in prison in the death of his infant son, according to our media partners at the Cincinnati Enquirer.
The 1st District Court of Appeals issued the decision April 22, saying that Joshua Mounts received ineffective assistance from both an attorney who handled his appeal and his attorney at trial.
The appeals court, in a 3-0 ruling, ordered a new trial.
Mounts was convicted in 2021 of felony murder, but acquitted of aggravated murder, in the death of his 7-month-old son, Jayce Fitzhugh.
Jayce died in 2018 from severe brain injuries, which prosecutors said were caused by Mounts. His attorneys said the injuries were possibly weeks old and could have been caused by previous medical trauma, including the boy’s history of episodes where he would stop breathing.
Both sides relied on the testimony of multiple experts who offered competing theories about how and why Jayce died.
What happened to Jayce Fitzhugh?
The death of Joshua Mounts's infant son was ruled a homicide.(WXIX)
Mounts, now 35, was caring for Jayce alone when the boy was found unresponsive the morning of Jan. 25, 2018, the Enquirer reports.
Mounts and Jayce’s mother, Kayla Fitzhugh, didn’t live together but would see each other almost every week, according to testimony. Fitzhugh, who lived with her grandparents, said she was Jayce’s primary caretaker. Mounts lived with his parents.
The previous night, Jan. 24, Fitzhugh brought Jayce to Mounts’ home. According to testimony, Mounts and Fitzhugh took him to run errands, then a location where Mounts bought unspecified drugs.
They returned to Mounts’ home, but Fitzhugh said she left at about 11 p.m. because she had an appointment in the morning.
Mounts told police that Jayce slept on his bed, in his bedroom. The opinion notes that one side of the bed was pushed against a wall, and a pillow had been placed on the other side, “as if to prevent (the baby) from falling off.”
Mounts said Jayce slept through the night and woke up the next morning, crying, wanting to be fed. He said he prepared a bottle and then found Jayce not breathing.
Jayce was rushed to Cincinnati Children’s Hospital where he later died.
Expert testified without submitting report
One of the experts called to testify by prosecutors was a doctor who heads the hospital’s Mayerson Center, which consults in child abuse cases. Dr. Kathi Makoroff testified that Jayce’s injuries were consistent with child abuse.
The appeals court said Makoroff testified despite not having submitted an expert report.
Ohio law requires expert witnesses to first prepare a written report summarizing their conclusions or opinion. The purpose of the rule is “to prevent unfair surprise,” the opinion says, and allow a defendant an opportunity to challenge an expert’s findings.
The Enquirer reports Mounts’ attorney’s “failure to object to this testimony, which introduced a previously undisclosed expert opinion on a central issue in the case,” the opinion says, “fell below an objective standard of reasonable representation and therefore constituted deficient performance.”
His trial attorney was Kip Guinan, who now heads the Hamilton County Prosecutor’s Office’s criminal division. He could not be reached for comment on April 22.
Hamilton County Prosecutor Connie Pillich said in a statement that she is aware of the appeals court’s decision and is “reviewing the options going forward.”
Differing conclusions
The appeals court’s opinion also said Guinan did not sufficiently challenge the prosecution’s objection to one of his expert witnesses.
A critical issue in the trial was when Jayce suffered the skull fracture and brain bleeding – something that, according to the opinion, could only be determined by examining slides of brain tissue through a microscope.
A forensic neuropathologist, Dr. Andrea Wiens, initially hired by prosecutors but who ended up being a defense witness, testified that Jayce’s skull fracture happened at least a few weeks before he died and that there was evidence it was healing.
That conclusion was based upon Wiens reviewing a “recut” slide supplied by another witness. According to the opinion, prosecutors attacked her credibility based mainly on the assumption that she had not examined the original slide.
During a break in the trial, Wiens reviewed the original slide and determined that it did not change her opinion. But prosecutors objected to her testifying about that because the original slide was not part of her expert report.
During a sidebar, according to the opinion, the judge suggested to Guinan that he amend the pathologist’s report, but Guinan instead decided to “abandon the entire line of questioning.”
The appeals court said the decision to abandon the testimony about the slides “fell below an objective standard of reasonableness.”
The court said that if Mounts’ first appellate attorney had raised ineffective assistance of counsel in the initial appeal, it would have overturned the conviction.
The 1st District had initially upheld the conviction in 2023. It then permitted Mounts to reopen his appeal on the basis of ineffective assistance of counsel and to raise issues that were not part of his first appeal."
The entire story can be read at:
