The Ohio Supreme Court now has to decide whether to review or leave alone the ruling by the 7th District Court of Appeals affirming the conviction and sentence of Brandon Crump Jr. to 52 years to life in prison for killing 4-year-old Rowan Sweeney.

After the 7th District affirmed Crump’s conviction and sentence in the 2020 killing in Struthers, attorney J.P. Laczko appealed that decision to the Ohio Supreme Court, which can either review or not review the Crump case. If it refuses to review it, the decision of the lower court stands.

The filing by Ohio Assistant Attorney General Drew Wood as a special prosecutor for Mahoning County bore down on the reasons why the Supreme Court does or does not accept a case for review — whether the case presents a substantial constitutional question that needs to be answered.

Woods, who is handling the appeal because the Mahoning County Prosecutor’s Office has a conflict of interest, argued that all matters raised in the appeal are already resolved by “existing standards of law that require no clarification” by the Ohio Supreme Court. “The issues involved are primarily of interest to the parties and are not matters of public or great general interest.”

Woods then discussed the arguments Laczko made to suggest reasons the top court should have concerns about the 7th District’s affirmation of Crump’s guilt and sentence.

Among Laczko’s reasons were the use of potentially prejudicial crime scene photos showing the boy after being killed, inadequate evidence to support Crump’s conviction for conspiracy, insufficient evidence of Crump’s guilt to find him guilty of other offenses and failure to sufficiently consider “mitigating factors during sentencing.”

Laczko said the case is of great general interest and involves a “substantial constitutional question,” saying the review would allow the top court to correct “significant errors that compromised the fairness of (Crump’s) trial and sentencing.”

One error, Laczko contends, was the jury and judge’s “reliance on unreliable and biased witness testimony.” Another was an “unduly harsh sentence that ignored mitigating factors such as (Crump’s) traumatic upbringing and mental health challenges.”

Laczko summarized the case by saying that on Sept. 21, 2020, at about 1:51 a.m., gunfire erupted at a home on Perry Street in Struthers, killing Rowan and injuring his mother, Alexis Schneider, Andre McCoy Jr., Yarnell Green and Cassandra Marsicola.

Scheider initially identified co-defendant Kimonie Bryant as the shooter from a Struthers police photo lineup. Later, Schneider identified Crump as the shooter after viewing his photo from another source, the summary states.

Marsicola described the shooter in a way that “conflicted with (Crump’s) appearance” and “identified Bryant in a photographic lineup” as the shooter, the filing states. Laczko argued that Crump’s guilty verdicts were “against the manifest weight of evidence” because “eyewitness testimony lacked reliability due to inconsistencies and delays in identification and credibility.”

Laczko stated that “Critical aspects of the state’s evidence rested on witness testimony lacking corroborative strength, increasing the need for rigorous judicial review.” He added that the “lack of direct evidence linking (Crump) to the conspiracy (of Crump, Bryant and McCoy) and the speculative nature of the state’s case render the jury’s verdict unsustainable,” Laczko stated.

In the prosecution filing, Woods related that after the gunman entered the Struthers home, Scheider “attempted to shield” her son “with her own body. She begged the gunman not to kill her baby.” The gunman told her to “shut the (deleted) up,” then shot her and her son, the filing states. Nothing covered the gunman’s face. “The gunman didn’t stop shooting until the gun went ‘click.'”

McCoy was a co-conspirator, arranging the robbery of the home with Bryant via text message. Shortly after McCoy texted Bryant, “Crump sent a Facebook message indicating that Crump was looking for his keys and his gun,” the filing states. “Cell tower data showed (the phones of) Crump and Bryant subsequently traveling together to (the Struthers home), where they stayed until the time of the robbery,” Woods’ filing continues.

“Crump’s cellular phone videos, recorded shortly after the shooting, show Crump in clothing matching the shooter’s clothing and in possession of a large sum of money,” the filing states.

It is not known when the Ohio Supreme Court will rule on whether to review the case.