COLUMBUS, Ohio — Last November, former Columbus police officer Adam Coy was convicted of murder, reckless homicide and felonious assault for the shooting death of Andre Hill in 2020.

What You Need To Know

  • Defense attorneys for the former Columbus police officer convicted of murder, Adam Coy, are seeking a new trial
  • They said the prosecution didn't share communication records with a potential expert who never testified

  • According to defense attorneys, his testimony would've changed the trajectory of the trial in favor of Coy

  • Prosecutors said the communication records are attorney-client privilege

Coy’s defense attorneys are now asking the judge for a new trial because they say information that prosecutors withheld from them could’ve changed the trajectory of the trial. 

“The state of Ohio withheld an expert who provided them an opinion that supported the defense’s theory, and it would have changed our entire strategy,” said defense attorney Kaitlyn Stephens. 

Stephens, arguing on behalf of Adam Coy, is asking a judge to force prosecutors to testify about why they never shared their communication with potential use-of-force expert Jamie Borden. Prosecutors believe that communication is attorney client privilege. 

“There’s at least one communication that’s purely attorney client privilege, Your Honor, and that has to do with the defendant’s request for discovery and preservation of evidence,” said prosecuting attorney Amy Hiers. 

Coy's attorney filed a motion for a new trial in November when they claimed there was misconduct among the prosecutors who hid an expert witness from the defense, who provided "the State of Ohio with an opinion that Adam Coy’s conduct was consistent with a response to a perceived deadly threat, and therefore, he was justified in his response."

The defense said the prosecution never handed over that information.

“100% would have impacted. Remember, this is a unique case in that we have a burden. So, would we have a burden? And if you put a witness on and that witness gives a professional opinion and I also asked that witness, we were also contacted by the government. And did you give the government that same opinion? And they indicate, yes, that changes the whole thing with regards to what happens in front of a jury,” said defense attorney, Mark Collins.  

Fraternal Order Of Police president, Brian Steel, was in attendance during Monday’s hearing and he said he’s feeling even more confused. 

“More questions than answers. At no time would I ever thought this is a coverup, until the prosecutor said, ‘This is not a coverup.’ So where does that come from? These are public employees. These are taxpayer funded employees, and they’re not turning over documents they don’t want to turn. They don’t want to testify. They’re trying to quash subpoenas. So I have questions. Why?” said Steel. 

Judge Stephen McIntosh has set another hearing for April 14, at which former prosecutor Anthony Pierson is set to testify. There’s no word at this point when McIntosh could make a ruling.