A federal appeals court in Cincinnati this week found that an Ohio death-row inmate was not entitled to habeas relief as he had argued in U.S. District Court.

A three-judge panel of the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals held that the trial court properly excluded certain hearsay by the victim's husband, appellate counsel was not ineffective in failing to challenge the omission of a catch-all mitigation factor from the jury instructions, and sufficient evidence supports the jury's guilty verdict for rape in the matter of Dennis McGuire, who was convicted of the kidnapping, rape and aggravated murder of Joy Stewart.

As for the first argument, the appellate judges held that the excluded statement was not unquestionably against Stewart's husband's interest because the statement would explain the potential presence of his semen on his wife's body.

"The statement was not spontaneous, but rather a response to police questioning; the statement was not corroborated by other evidence; and Kenny Stewart was not available for cross-examination at trial," 6th Circuit Judge John Rogers wrote for the court. "Therefore, the Supreme Court of Ohio did not unreasonably apply federal law when it held that excluding Kenny Stewart's statement did not violate McGuire's constitutional rights, and McGuire was not entitled to habeas relief on this basis."

Regarding McGuire's second argument, the panel determined cases in which the U.S. Supreme Court has granted habeas relief when a trial court's jury instructions precluded consideration of proper mitigating evidence were inapposite because the cases originated from states that do not reweigh on appeal - unlike Ohio.

"McGuire's claim also finds no support in Gardner v. Florida, 430 U.S. 349 (1977), in which the Supreme Court held that a due-process violation occurs when a trial court imposes a death sentence partially based on information never disclosed to the defendant and which the defendant therefore could not deny or explain," Rogers continued.

"McGuire's death sentence, by contrast, was based wholly on evidence McGuire heard in open court and could deny or explain by means permitted in the state rules of evidence. Therefore, McGuire was not entitled to habeas relief on this claim."

Finally, the man's final argument that the evidence was insufficient to show compulsion by force or threat of force was met no more favorably by the panel. The judges reasoned McGuire told law enforcement that another man had raped the woman and he told fellow inmates she had refused to have sex with him.

"Medical evidence of skin abrasions was consistent with compulsion by force," Rogers concluded. "In addition, Stewart's body was found lying on the ground without a coat, out of doors in the Ohio winter. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, a rational trier of fact could find that McGuire purposely compelled Joy Stewart to engage in sexual conduct with him, and the Supreme Court of Ohio was not unreasonable when it decided that sufficient evidence supported the jury's verdict that McGuire was guilty of rape.

"Because sufficient evidence supported the jury's guilty verdict for rape, sufficient evidence supported the jury's findings that McGuire is guilty of aggravated murder and eligible for the death penalty based on rape."

Senior Judge Eugene Siler Jr. and fellow 6th Circuit Judge Jeffrey Sutton joined Rogers to form the majority.

The case is McGuire v. State of Ohio, et al., case No. 07-3991.