COLUMBUS, Ohio - The Supreme Court of Ohio is scheduled to hear oral arguments next week in a case that could decide how the state defines a driver’s intent when a person is killed on the highway.

The case involves Leander Bissell, who was sentenced to 16 years to life in prison after striking and killing Cleveland Firefighter Johnny Tetrick in November 2022. Tetrick was responding to a separate crash on Interstate 90 when Bissell drove through the scene and hit him.

The central question for the justices is whether Bissell acted "knowingly" or "recklessly". Under Ohio law, a person acts knowingly if they are aware that their conduct will probably cause a certain result.

Recklessness is defined as a heedless indifference to a known risk. A trial judge initially found Bissell guilty of murder, ruling that the heavy police presence and flashing lights should have made him aware that his high speed would probably cause harm.

The Eighth District Court of Appeals later overturned the murder conviction. The appellate court ruled that while Bissell was impatient and careless, the state did not prove he knew he was likely to hit a person.

The court noted that there was no evidence Bissell saw the firefighter before the impact or deliberately aimed his car at him. Furthermore, the firefighter had his back to traffic while picking up debris when the collision occurred. The court reduced the conviction to involuntary manslaughter, which carries a shorter prison term.

Cuyahoga County prosecutors asked the Supreme Court to reinstate the original murder conviction, arguing that driving around police cars at high speeds through an active crash scene meets the legal definition of acting knowingly.

 Bissell’s attorneys maintain that the scene was disorganized and that his actions were at most reckless. They argue that a murder sentence is not justified because he did not have a degree of certainty that his driving would result in a death.

The Ohio Attorney General's Office and several first responder organizations have filed briefs supporting the prosecution, while a group of law professors filed a brief supporting Bissell’s position