Impasse Declared in Bribery Trial of Former FirstEnergy Executives
Impasse Declared in Ohio Bribery Trial of Former FirstEnergy Executives
On March 31, 2026, Ohio Judge Susan Baker Ross declared an impasse in a bribery trial after over a week of jury deliberations against two former executives of FirstEnergy Corp.
The two former executives, former CEO Chuck Jones and former Senior Vice President of External Affairs Michael Dowling, were indicted in February 2024 of bribing Ohio Public Utilities Commission Chair and former lobbyist Sam Randazzo to secure a $1.3 billion financial bailout of two of the Company’s nuclear plants.
The indictment against the former executives alleges that Dowling oversaw the negotiation of an $8.5 million consulting agreement with SFA-Ohio, an entity owned by Randazzo, in 2015. Prosecutors claim that the consulting agreement was intended to conceal settlements from a Public Utilities Commission case that were being “funneled” through Randazzo.
In 2018, Jones and Dowling supported Randazzo’s appointment as Public Utilities Commission chair and paid to him the $4.33 million outstanding on the 2015 consulting agreement. The indictment alleges that Jones, Dowling and Randazzo then conspired to “steal money from FirstEnergy, write legislative provisions worth unearned millions of dollars to FirstEnergy, legally guarantee FirstEnergy’s continued profitability and take over the state government in a way that allowed FirstEnergy to regulate itself.”
Jones and Dowling were charged with one count of bribery, two counts of telecommunications fraud, four counts of money laundering, and one count of conspiracy. Dowling was also charged with two counts of tampering with records.
The trial of Jones and Dowling started in early February. Counsel for defendants claimed throughout the trial that prosecutors engaged in misconduct. They claimed that the trial revealed that prosecutors withheld “highly exculpatory material going to the heart of the case” from the defense. They also asserted that a U.S. Senator Jon Husted, was allowed to testify concerning the guilt of the defendants, which evaded the province of the jury.
Carole Rendon, counsel for Jones, issued a statement that “While we are disappointed that the jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict, we are not surprised given the numerous incidents of prosecutorial misconduct that occurred before and during this trial which infected the record in this case.” “We hope the state of Ohio rethinks its decision to retry this case given the legal insufficiency of the charges. If not, we are prepared to seek a judgment of acquittal and will continue to vigorously defend Mr. Jones.”
Prosecutors have indicated they plan to retry Jones and Dowling.