After nearly 15 years on the bench as a Franklin County Common Pleas Court judge, there aren't many firsts left for Mark Serrott.

But on Thursday, Serrott granted a new trial for a man who had been found guilty of murder by a jury in May.

LaRoy Robinson, 49, had been scheduled to be sentenced Thursday in the Dec. 2 death of 46-year-old Malik Islam.

"This court in a 14½-year tenure as a judge in hundreds of jury trials, has never overturned a jury verdict," Serrott wrote in his decision. "This case is the rare exceptional case where justice requires a new trial."

On May 31, a jury had found Robinson not guilty of purposefully killing Islam, but found Robinson guilty of killing Islam during a felonious assault, discharging a firearm near prohibited premises and felonious assault.

Evidence presented at Robinson's trial showed that around 12:10 a.m. on Dec. 2, Robinson was sitting in a parked car on the 2000 block of Cornell Avenue on the city's Northeast Side. Islam approached Robinson and was verbally aggressive towards Robinson.

After a second verbal confrontation, Robinson testified that he saw Islam reaching into a pocket for something that he thought was a gun. Robinson fired a single shot, which struck Islam, and drove away from the scene.

Robinson had argued at trial that he shot Islam in self-defense and that Islam had a reputation for being violent and dangerous, which multiple witnesses testified to during the trial.

Following the jury's verdict, Robinson's attorney, Touré McCord, filed a motion to dismiss the case or for Serrott to set aside the verdict and grant Robinson a new trial.

McCord's main argument surrounded an instruction given to the jury before it began its deliberations about whether Robinson was required to retreat before using deadly force.

Prosecutors had argued the verdict should stand and any issues with the case could be taken up on an appeal after Robinson was sentenced.

Serrott determined in his ruling that the instruction he gave the jury was "the exact opposite of what the law requires."

"The instructions likely misled the jury," Serrott wrote in his decision, adding in a footnote that at least four jurors had asked Serrott after the case if Ohio had "stand your ground" laws.

"These jurors indicated they would never have voted guilty had they known the defendant had no duty to escape or retreat," Serrott wrote. "One juror was visibly upset and has repeatedly contacted the court regarding changing the verdict."

Serott noted in his decision that giving someone a new trial before they are sentenced and the case is reviewed by an appeals court is an "extraordinary remedy," but felt it was the correct thing to do under the circumstances.

Serrott also found the jury's verdict was contrary to law because the evidence did not clearly disprove Robinson's assertion that he acted in self-defense when he shot Islam.

"The erroneous jury instructions only further contributed to and compounded the injustice of the verdicts," Serrott wrote.

Robinson's case is set for a hearing on July 8. No new trial date has been set.