Convicted Cuyahoga killer granted new trial after key witness recants

Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Judge Jeffrey Saffold granted a convicted killer a new trial during a court hearing Tuesday morning.

Roberto Wynn was granted a new trial after the "star witness" in his case recanted her testimony during an evidentiary hearing in Cuyahoga Co. Common Pleas Court last month.

READ MORE: Key witness in 2008 Cuyahoga murder case recants testimony

Saffold gave Wynn the opportunity to present Clifshell Stevenson's recantation after a News 5 Investigation revealed Wynn had waited over two years for a ruling on his motion for a new trial.

Wynn was convicted of the fatal shooting of Christopher Basie, who died in the drive-by shooting on Parmelee Avenue, in 2008.

"Star witness" recants

During last month's hearing, Stevenson testified that her trial testimony identifying Roberto Wynn as the shooter was not truthful.

She said, "I did not see him fire a gun." Instead, she said she saw him "running for cover."

She said she has felt guilty about her initial testimony for years.

"I just feel like my spirit been under attack since this all transpired," she said.

Stevenson was 13 when she first testified in the case. She said she felt pressured by Cleveland police and a family member to name Wynn.

Cuyahoga prosecutors said Stevenson is not a credible witness and that three other witnesses, who had similar stories, also identified Wynn as the shooter.

News 5 Investigation

Judge Saffold granted Wynn's attorney permission to file a motion for a new trial after a July attorney conference held the same day the News 5 investigation into Wynn's case aired.

READ MORE: He says he's innocent. Now, he gets a chance to prove it.

The report highlighted that Wynn had been waiting over two years for a ruling on his motion to seek a new trial.

"I appreciate you airing this story, not just for myself, but for everybody else that's wrongfully incarcerated," Wynn said during a phone call from prison with News 5.

The witness signed a letter recanting her testimony in 2022.

In the letter, she said she "blamed" Wynn for a shooting that "he didn't commit" and that she was sure he "didn't have a gun."

She wrote that she was mad at him at the time and did not realize his "life would be spent in a cage" over her statements.

The Ohio Innocence Project filed a motion requesting the hearing to present the evidence in 2024.

WATCH MORE about the case below:

RELATED: The 'star' witness recanted. So why can't he get a new trial?

Wynn's interview

Prior to last month's hearing, Wynn said he was anxious, excited and nervous about Tuesday's hearing.

"My life is in the balance," he said. " I just want my freedom back."

Wynn's parents said they are hopeful Wynn will ultimately be set free.

"It's not just him locked up. We been locked up too," Wynn's father, Ronnie, said.

"I look at it as my prayers has been answered," Wynn's mother, Carla Butler, said.

Innocence cases often languish

"Unfortunately, delays are very common," Michael Donnelly, a former Cuyahoga County Common Pleas judge, said.

"It's not because of an individual judge. It's a systemic problem," he said.

After 14 years on the Cuyahoga County bench, Donnelly was elected to the Ohio Supreme Court. He is currently an adjunct law professor at Cleveland State University's College of Law and the creator of Ohio Court Watch, which aims to increase transparency and oversight in the state's legal system.

RELATED: Who gets a second chance with the Ohio Supreme Court and who doesn't?

"The safeguards that people have on the front end of the system, like the right to an attorney, the right to a speedy trial, those don't exist," he said. "As a result, cases can languish.

Since 2014, News 5 Investigators have found 28 Cuyahoga County cases where motions for a new trial have been open longer than 120 days, the standard set by the Ohio Supreme Court.

"In post-conviction [proceedings], people can basically file anything," Donnelly said. "There's a lot of the motions that are frivolous."

"Unfortunately, cases that do have merit that have been opposed by the state and there may be evidence to be tested they get lost in the mix," he said.

What's being done to prevent this?

Ohio Court Watch recently launched a website that tracks cases involving innocence claims, hoping to shine a light on people waiting to learn whether they will be allowed to present new evidence.

A proposed state law would also make it easier for innocence claimants to obtain post-conviction relief.

H.B. 177 requires judges to hold a hearing when they find that an innocence claimant's case has credible new evidence. However, like many innocence cases, the legislation has also languished.

The bill was introduced in March 2025 and assigned to the Ohio House Judiciary Committee but has yet to receive a single hearing.

"This would be a reform of great significance," Donnelly said. "If you could undermine the theory of guilt, you're entitled to a new trial under the law," he said.

"But the hurdle because of the flaw in the law in post-conviction right now you can't get there."

Donnelly said attorneys can complain to the Ohio Court of Appeals or the Ohio Supreme Court when a judge delays ruling on a motion.

However, he said most attorneys do not because they fear angering the judge whose ruling they are seeking.