Convicted Murderer Appeals Case To Ohio Supreme Court

Posted on:

< < Back to

A 22-year-old man convicted of murder and aggravated robbery is asking that the Ohio Supreme Court consider his argument that he deserves a lesser sentence than life without parole until 28 years have been served.

In a notice filed March 7 in the Supreme Court and March 11 in Athens County Common Pleas Court, Mahat Osman asked the court to reconsider the judgment of the 4th District Court of Appeals, which upheld the trial court's ruling.

Osman was sentenced to 28 years to life in prison for his involvement in a 2009 New Marshfield robbery that led to the death of Donnie Putnam, according to previous Messenger reporting.

Osman was charged along with co-defendants Abdifatah Abdi and Phillip Boler. They, and Hamda Jama, went to the home of Bill Osborne Feb. 15, 2009 and a shootout ensued. Putnam arrived in the midst of the shootout and was killed in the crossfire.

The three men were all found guilty and all were sentenced to 28 years to life in prison. For her part, Jama pleaded out to the aggravated robbery charge and was sentenced to four years in prison.

Abdi and Osman won the right through appeals to be re-sentenced. Their arguments stemmed from a court case regarding multiple offenses committed with the same animus, called allied offenses. Allied offenses can be merged during sentencing.

Osman's sentenced was reaffirmed and he appealed again. The Court of appeals found in favor of the prosecution, agreeing that his crimes were committed with separate animus or mindsets.

Abdi entered into a plea agreement and still received a life sentence but with the possibility of parole after 15 years rather than 28.

Defense attorney Samuel Weiner argued at Osman’s re-sentencing hearing that it was another individual that shot Putnam while recklessly firing through a window. He said Osman went to the residence with the intention of robbing it and no other; that whatever ensued should be considered part of the robbery and the sentences should be served concurrently rather than consecutive as it stood.

At this point, Osman is asking the Supreme Court to hear the case. It is not known whether the court will accept.