MURDER Selection of jury to begin in slaying
Dubose's cousin also is charged and awaiting trial.
YOUNGSTOWN -- Jury selection begins Monday afternoon in Mahoning County Common Pleas Court for one of two men charged in a 2001 homicide.
Ceyanie D. Dubose, 28, who listed a Lora Avenue address, is charged with aggravated murder with a firearm specification. Police said he killed Marcus Bradley on Nov. 12, 2001, on the city's South Side. Bradley was shot numerous times in the head.
Dubose faces life imprisonment if convicted. The firearm specification carries an additional three-year sentence.
County Prosecutor Paul J. Gains will try the state's case, his first since the trial of Martin Koliser in November 2003. Koliser was convicted of killing Youngstown Patrolman Michael Hartzell in April 2003.
Judge James C. Evans will preside over the proceedings. Dubose is represented by defense lawyers Douglas B. Taylor and Ronald E. Knickerbocker.
Police found Bradley, also known as Marcus Moore, shot to death at Mercer Avenue and Hoffman Street. Bradley had moved to Youngstown from Minnesota about a year before he was killed, police officials have said.
Police had little evidence to go on, but while investigating another crime, agents from the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and Explosives gleaned new information that led police to Dubose and his cousin, Edward L. Dubose, 23, of Albert Street, police said.
A county grand jury indicted them on the aggravated murder charge in 2003. Both have been in the county jail since then.
Conflict of interest
The cases were separated, and Edward Dubose was supposed to have been tried on the charges in April, but Judge Evans declared a mistrial.
Atty. Anthony P. Meranto, who at the time represented Edward Dubose, also had represented a defense witness, who would have given his client an alibi.
Meranto said the case in which he represented the defense witness was resolved and unrelated to the Dubose matter.
He said, however, the county prosecutor's office probably would have questioned the defense witness to Dubose's detriment.
Judge Evans explained to Dubose that the jurors, who were impaneled, might draw a negative conclusion toward him if they knew he and his alibi witness were represented by the same lawyer.
The judge said that creates a potential conflict and an appearance of impropriety. He then appointed another lawyer to represent Edward Dubose and set a new trial date.