The jury ultimately convicted Rogers, 44, of one count each of rape of a child younger than 10, attempted rape of a child younger than 10 and six counts of gross sexual imposition, all felony charges. Judge Robert Peeler sentenced him to 15 years to life.
Rogers is incarcerated in the London Correctional Institution and will be eligible for parole in 2038, according to the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation & Correction website.
Credit: Ohio Department of Rehabilitation & Correction
Credit: Ohio Department of Rehabilitation & Correction
Rogers appealed his conviction to the 12th District Court of Appeals, based in Middletown, claiming that the juror showed bias against him and tainted the jury, requiring a new trial. He also said his attorney was ineffective by not challenging the prospective juror for cause and eliminating him from the panel.
The Warren County Prosecutor’s Office responded that a prospective juror’s preconceived thoughts about a case do not mean a person can’t be impartial, and that in group answers the juror also said he could fairly decide the case, according to court records.
Appellate judges in April 2024 upheld Rogers’ conviction, agreeing with the prosecution that the full jury, including the juror in question, answered in the affirmative when asked whether they could apply the law as explained to them, along with other similar questions. The record as a whole shows that the juror was not biased, the appeals court concluded in its ruling.
Rogers then appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court, which agreed to review the issues:
- When prospective jurors confirm as a group that they will apply the law, does that overcome one prospective juror’s expressions of partiality?
- After expressing partiality, must a prospective juror individually affirm that he or she can be impartial to be seated on the jury?
A Warren County grand jury indicted Rogers in September 2022 on charges of rape, attempted rape and gross sexual imposition involving an 8-year-old girl known to Rogers who said she had been abused since she was 5, according to court records.
Prospective jurors were asked questions by the judge, prosecutor and defense counsel during voir dire, with some questions directed individually and others to the group as a whole.
The judge explained the nature of the case, that it involved a child and that jurors would hear from a child witness.
The judge said to the group of prospective jurors: “You can’t apply sympathy and you can’t apply prejudice. It has to be fair when you’re evaluating this case. Is there anyone who thinks they would have trouble doing that with a child witness?”
One prospective juror, who was identified in the briefs by the fictitious name “McCarthy,” said, “I might have a hard time with it.” The judge asked McCarthy: “Do you think you can follow the instructions I give to you in this case … Can you put that aside and listen to the evidence and, and be fair?” McCarthy responded: “It’s a good question. I don’t have an answer for you.” The judge said the attorneys could explore McCarthy’s responses further.
Defense counsel asked the group, “So if you had to give us a verdict right now, guilty or not guilty, knowing that there’s a presumption of innocence, that he’s innocent as he sits here right now, what would your verdict be?”
McCarthy responded, “I’d say it’d be hard for me to say that’s he’s not guilty,” he said. “… there’s someone from the police department that’s gonna talk. So, yeah, people don’t wind up here from not doing anything.” Defense counsel did not seek to remove McCarthy as a juror.
Rogers argues that McCarthy expressed bias against him throughout voir dire. McCarthy said that he did not know whether he could fairly evaluate a case involving a child. He also said he would have difficulty presuming Rogers was innocent until proven otherwise.
“It is hard to imagine a more explicit admission of bias,” Rogers’ brief stated, and also noted that the juror never individually said he would set aside his opinions, which Rogers said resulted in a jury that was not impartial.
Warren County prosecutors said a juror’s preconceived notion about a defendant’s guilt or innocence does not mean a prospective juror is not capable of being impartial and that McCarthy’s responses showed his internal struggle rather than an actual bias.
About the Author
