The Ohio Supreme Court has once again dealt a devastating blow to convicted murderer Mackenzie Shirilla, refusing to hear her appeal and leaving her facing the prospect of spending the rest of her life behind bars for a horrific 2022 crash that killed two teenagers. The court’s decision, signed by Chief Justice Sharon Kennedy, was a terse order declining to accept jurisdiction, effectively shutting the door on Shirilla’s latest legal challenge. This marks the second time the state’s highest court has rejected her case, cementing a path that now seems to lead only to prison walls.
Shirilla, now 20, was just 17 when she drove her car at over 100 miles per hour into a building in Strongsville, Ohio, killing her boyfriend Dominic Russo and his friend DaVon Flanigan. A judge in a bench trial found her guilty of four counts of murder, four counts of felonious assault, two counts of aggravated vehicular homicide, and other charges. She is serving two concurrent sentences of 15 years to life, with her first chance at parole not coming until 2037.
The appeal rejected this week was not a direct challenge to her conviction but a postconviction relief petition centered on claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. Shirilla’s legal team argued that her trial lawyers failed to adequately investigate a pre-existing medical condition known as POTS, or postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome, which can cause dizziness and fainting. They contended that this condition might have caused her to black out moments before the crash, potentially undermining the prosecution’s case.
In her brief to the Supreme Court, Shirilla’s attorneys wrote that she “is serving a life sentence for murdering her two passengers” despite medical evidence suggesting a blackout could have occurred. They claimed that defense counsel, though aware of her condition, did not secure expert testimony or fully explore this angle. The prosecution, however, countered with a mountain of evidence from the trial, including data from the car’s recorder showing Shirilla drove at 95 mph in a 35 mph zone with the accelerator fully depressed and never applied the brakes.
The core of the legal dispute revolved around a procedural technicality: the deadline for filing the postconviction petition. Ohio law requires such petitions to be filed within 365 days of the trial transcript being filed in a direct appeal. Shirilla’s new lawyers filed their petition on October 24, 2024, but the trial transcript had been filed on October 23, 2023. Because 2024 was a leap year, they were exactly one day late.
Shirilla’s team argued that the clock should have started later, when transcripts from a juvenile court probable cause hearing were filed on December 15, 2023. They claimed this hearing was crucial to her case and should be considered part of the trial record. The state, however, rejected this interpretation, arguing that the term “trial transcript” refers specifically to the proceeding where guilt was determined, not a pre-trial hearing.
The Eighth District Court of Appeals unanimously sided with the prosecution, ruling that Shirilla’s petition was untimely. The court noted that the juvenile hearing was not a trial and that the statutory language was clear. In their response to the Supreme Court, prosecutors emphasized that Shirilla herself had referred to the October 23 filing as the “trial transcripts” in her own documents, undermining her later argument.
Prosecutors also dismissed claims of constitutional violations, arguing that Shirilla had forfeited those arguments by not raising them earlier. They pointed to the overwhelming evidence at trial, including her own threats to crash the car with her boyfriend inside. The state’s brief concluded that this case “fails to present an issue of public or great general interest” and was merely about a missed deadline due to counsel’s mistake.
The Ohio Supreme Court’s refusal to hear the case does not necessarily mean it agreed with the prosecution, but the outcome is the same. Shirilla is now out of legal options unless she can uncover new evidence that proves her innocence. Her only remaining hope is parole in 2037, though her behavior in prison and a Netflix documentary about her case could complicate that effort.
In the documentary, Shirilla maintained her innocence, saying, “I’m big on the no intent. There was no intent whatsoever there.” She expressed remorse for the victims’ families, but the court has now twice declined to revisit her case. The physical evidence, including the car’s data recorder and witness testimony, painted a picture of intentional, reckless behavior that the courts have consistently upheld.
For now, Shirilla remains incarcerated, and the families of Dominic Russo and DaVon Flanigan can find some closure in the legal system’s finality. The Supreme Court’s decision underscores the high bar for postconviction relief and the strict adherence to procedural rules, even in cases with tragic circumstances. Shirilla’s fight is over, at least for the foreseeable future, as she faces the reality of a life sentence.
