LISBON — The Supreme Court of Ohio recently declined to accept jurisdiction for an appeal sought by a Canfield man sentenced to three years in prison in March 2024 for aggravated vehicular homicide and vehicular assault.

Lowell Horst, 30, Lisbon Road, tried to take the case to the Ohio Supreme Court after losing the appeal his attorney filed with the Seventh District Court of Appeals last year, with the appellate court issuing its decision at the end of January, affirming the trial court’s judgment, although there was a dissenting opinion issued.

In a brief entry, the Ohio Supreme Court declined the case last month. The attorneys for Horst made some of the same arguments in their memorandum to the Supreme Court of Ohio that were made for the appellate appeal.

Horst remains incarcerated after Columbiana County Common Pleas Court Judge Megan Bickerton sentenced him on March 8, 2024. A jury found him guilty of the two charges. His driver’s license was suspended for 15 years.

Horst admitted to watching sports highlights on YouTube on his phone and not paying attention while driving west on state Route 172 on Sept. 22, 2023. Ohio State Highway Patrol investigators concluded his Chevy Silverado traveled left of center and collided head-on with an eastbound GMC Terrain. The driver of the GMC Terrain, Leslie Coss, 83, of Massillon, suffered serious physical injuries and his wife, Mary Coss, 81, died at the scene. Leslie Coss died a few months later.

Their daughter, Sharon Lendon, administrator of their estates, filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Horst and his employee, Weaver Steel Construction of Leetonia, that was settled and dismissed in the fall.

In the appeal to the Seventh District Court, Horst’s appellate attorneys argued that a potential juror in his case was improperly excluded based on his religion, that the defendant’s expert witness, Henry Lipian, was improperly prohibited from providing Perception Response Time testimony that could have negated a finding of recklessness and the court erred by failing to instruct the jury on a lesser-included offense of vehicular homicide.

The majority of the appellate court found the arguments without merit, affirming the trial court’s decisions.

The appellate court decision noted that the potential juror was a Mennonite minister and admitted during questioning that he doesn’t like to stand judgment of someone, with his vocation making it more challenging, but that he could do it. The court noted that “regardless, Ohio law does not prohibit the use of a peremptory challenge based on religion.” The argument by the defense was found without merit and overruled.

The appellate court decision, which was written by Judge Cheryl Waite and agreed with by Judge Scot Stevenson, sitting by assignment from the Ninth District Court of Appeals, went into great detail about the testimony of Lipian and the defendant.

Based on the record,Waite wrote that “the trial court’s decision to limit the PRT testimony in this case was correct. Significantly, at best, Lipian could only testify as to when a reasonable person could have perceived the oncoming vehicle, not when appellant (Horst) actually saw the GMC.”

She wrote that the overwhelming evidence of record clearly shows that Horst didn’t see the other vehicle or notice that he traveled left of center because he was distracted by the sports highlights on a YouTube video.

“Whether this rose to the level of recklessness was solely a jury question,” the judge wrote.

As for whether the trial court erred by not giving the jury an instruction about a lesser included offense of vehicular homicide, the appellate court sided with the trial judge, saying she did not abuse her discretion.

In the dissenting opinion, Judge Mark Hanni dissented from the majority and wrote that the trial court erred in excluding the expert testimony regarding perception response time and should have given a jury instruction on the lesser-included offense of vehicular homicide.