Court Reversed Sentence for Dayton Murderer
The Second Appellate District remanded the case against Nicole Cunigan Jr. for a new sentencing hearing.
Updated on Oct. 12, 2026 in Criminal Justice
An appeals court has reversed the 39-years-to-life sentence given to Nicole Cunigan Jr. for a 2024 triple-homicide on Shatfesbury Road. While his convictions for murder and other charges were affirmed, the court found errors regarding consecutive sentencing and notification requirements.
Why it matters
The reversal mandates a new sentencing hearing because the original court failed to make necessary findings for repeat violent offender specifications and omitted required violent offender database notifications. This legal technicality ensures the sentencing process aligns with statutory requirements.
The Second Appellate District Court affirmed the conviction of Nicole Cunigan Jr. on multiple charges, including murder and felonious assault, but vacated the original sentence. The case must now return to the lower court to address procedural omissions.
The players
Nicole Cunigan Jr.
He is the defendant convicted for the May 2024 triple homicide in Dayton.
Second Appellate District Court
This is the judicial body that reviewed the trial court proceedings and remanded the case for resentencing.
Montgomery County Common Pleas Court
This is the trial court responsible for the original proceedings and the upcoming resentencing hearing.
The details
Nicole Cunigan Jr. was convicted for the May 2024 shooting that killed 16-year-old Deante Johnson, 32-year-old Precious Taste, and Taste's unborn child, who was 14 to 15 weeks along. The appellate court rejected four defense claims challenging the sufficiency of evidence regarding his convictions, which also included domestic violence and weapon-related charges.
Timeline
The shooting occurred on Shatfesbury Road on May 22, 2024.
A date for the resentencing hearing has not been scheduled as of October 12, 2026.
Legal Context
The reversal highlights the strict procedural requirements courts must follow when sentencing violent offenders in Ohio. Recent legislative trends place a heavy emphasis on ensuring defendants are fully notified of registry obligations and that consecutive sentences are supported by specific findings.
The decision guarantees that the sentencing process for a high-profile local homicide will undergo additional judicial review. Residents should note that while the conviction stands, the procedural correction ensures the final sentence adheres to state law.
The takeaway
The appellate decision clarifies that strict adherence to sentencing notification protocols is a mandatory check on trial court authority. Defendants and legal observers can use this case as a reference for how procedural omissions impact the finality of a prison sentence.
Further reading
For more information on legal proceedings in the area, visit the Criminal Justice section.
