Showing posts with label judges. Show all posts
Showing posts with label judges. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 17, 2012

Is Zimmerman's indictment based on evidence or politics?

Here's an exhaustive post - embedded with comments from various law types - that probable cause was likely not sufficient to justify the indictment.

And now his lawyers want a new judge.

Seminole Circuit Judge Jessica Recksiedler disclosed late last week that her husband works with CNN legal analyst Mark NeJame, who was approached by Zimmerman earlier in the week about representing him after his original lawyers quit. NeJame declined, but said he gave Zimmerman a short list of alternatives, including Mark O'Mara, who Zimmerman ultimately chose as his legal counsel shortly before his arrest.

O'Mara told
CNN late Monday night after filing his request that he expected Recksiedler to grant it and recuse herself.

Thursday, April 12, 2012

Zimmerman arrested and charged - What roles will each participant in the case play?

A good story for 2302 as we continue looking at the judiciary, and the criminal justice process in general. 2301s shoudl consider this case also as it opens a handful of issues related to the rights of criminal defendants, as well as those related to stand your ground laws.

The NYT details the decision to charge George Zimmerman with Trayvon Martin's shooting, and attempts to outline the events leading to the shooting (the facts of the case as best they can be discerned).

The Atlantic discusses what will be required of the prosecutor, the defendant, and the judge in the case. Given the amount of publicity the case has had - how likely will he get a fair trial?

Thursday, July 14, 2011

Mistrial in Clemens Case

The prosecution seems to have introduced inadmissible evidence, despite being warned by the judge. A jury is to be impartial - so ways Amendment #6.. Evidence that might jeopardize this is excluded from being introduced. The judge is supposed to oversee this guarantee. This one apparently did.

Story in the Washington Post:

One important piece of evidence was Andy Pettitte’s testimony that Clemens had told him he had taken human growth hormone. In previous proceedings, Pettitte’s wife Laura signed an affidavit affirming that her husband told her of the conversation the day it occurred.

But in pretrial decisions, Walton ruled that, because Laura Pettitte hadn’t heard the conversation directly, her testimony would be inadmissible.

So, what did the prosecution do? They apparently tried to go through a backdoor by showing the jury a video of Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) at the 2008 congressional hearings in which Clemens referred to Pettitte’s conversation with his wife. Laura Pettitte’s affidavit appeared on the courtroom monitor. And there it stayed in full view.

Thursday, October 7, 2010

Foreclosures Proceedings Stopped By Judges

Some checks and balances from Ezra Klein:

Judges across the country are ruling foreclosures illegal because of faulty paperwork, report Brady Dennis and Ariana Eunjung Cha: "If millions of foreclosures past and present were invalidated because of the way the hurried securitization process muddied the chain of ownership, banks could face lawsuits from homeowners and from investors who bought stakes in the mortgage securities - an expensive and potentially crippling proposition. For the fragile housing market, already clogged with foreclosure cases, it could mean gridlock and confusion for years. And there is concern in Washington that if the real estate market and financial institutions suffer harm, it could force the government to step in again."

Monday, August 16, 2010

Money in Judicial Elections

The Brennan Center has released a report on the recent increase in interest group spending on judicial elections. Sandra Day O'Connor has been critical of state judicial elections. Here's a link to her project focusing on them.

 

Sunday, May 23, 2010