“Georgia death-row inmate may need hearing over bawdy gifts, high court rules”: Bill Rankin of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution has a news update that begins, “The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday said a Cobb County man sentenced to death may need a new hearing because jurors sent lewd gifts to the trial judge and courthouse bailiff.”
And Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Chocolate Sex Gifts From Jury Put Guilty Verdict in Jeopardy.”
My earlier coverage appears at this link.
“California prisoner-release order on hold pending Supreme Court review”: David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has this news update.
Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Schwarzenegger Rejected by U.S. High Court on Inmates.”
And James Vicini of Reuters reports that “Court dismisses California prisoner release case.”
“Campaign finance ruling likely imminent; Either tomorrow or Monday next week”: Tom Goldstein has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”
“Court steps into murder case over jury’s gifts”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has a report that begins, “A closely divided Supreme Court has given hope to a Georgia death row inmate, ordering a federal appeals court to take a new look at his case because of raunchy gifts that jurors sent the judge and a courtroom bailiff.”
According to the article, “At issue is whether Wellons received a fair trial in light of disclosures that, after the penalty phase, the jurors sent chocolate in the shape of a penis to the judge and chocolate in the shape of a pair of breasts to the bailiff.”
You can access today’s per curiam ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in Wellons v. Hall, No. 09-5731, at this link.
Who knew that a death penalty jury in Georgia state court would find it appropriate to send the judge a chocolate penis? See, e.g., chocolate log cake described in footnote 4 of Guide to Episode 51 of “Curb Your Enthusiasm.”
Access online today’s Order List of the U.S. Supreme Court: The Court has posted today’s Order List at this link.
The Court did not grant review in any new cases today. Last Friday’s Order List granting review in five cases can be accessed here. Today’s order list, however, does feature a GVR in the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal. And the Court called for the views of the Solicitor General’s Office in one case.
The Court today also issued two per curiam opinions. One issued in Presley v. Georgia, No. 09-5270. The other issued in Wellons v. Hall, No. 09-5731.
In early news coverage, The Associated Press reports that “High court rejects challenge to Calif. prison plan“; “Court won’t close shipping locks to keep out carp“; and “High court throws out ruling favorable to suspect.”
And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Asian carp plea denied; no new grants.”
“Proposed order on judicial donations remains up for debate; Court says gifts can’t force recusals, but rule needs final approval”: The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel contains this article today.
And at the “Sustained Outrage” blog of The Charleston (W. Va.) Gazette, Andrew Clevenger has a post titled “Caperton, recusal and judicial elections.”
“State’s high court rules on marital property; Money earned by ET class-action specialist before divorce final is subject to split”: This article appears today in The Knoxville News Sentinel.
You can access last week’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Tennessee at this link.
“Shaken baby syndrome itself is put on trial in Fairfax court”: Today in The Washington Post, Tom Jackman has an article that begins, “As a criminal trial in Fairfax County tries to determine who, or what, caused 4-month-old Noah Whitmer’s brain hemorrhage, the debate over whether ‘shaken baby syndrome’ exists has erupted into a national battle of the experts.” Earlier, the newspaper reported that “Shaken-baby syndrome at center of Fairfax trial.”
“The Supreme Court’s Cult of Celebrity”: Guest bloggers Craig Lerner and Nelson Lund have this post today at “The Volokh Conspiracy.” The post discusses an article that they recently posted to SSRN.
“Grand Rapids teacher’s long fight over racial makeups of jury pools reaches Supreme Court”: This front page article appeared yesterday in The Grand Rapids Press.
“Wall Street May Seek to Sway Congress by Hiring Top Lawyer”: Bloomberg News has a report that begins, “Wall Street’s decision to hire a Supreme Court lawyer to study President Obama’s plan to tax banks may be aimed more at swaying lawmakers than winning a lawsuit, some constitutional experts said.”
“FBI broke law for years in phone record searches”: Today in The Washington Post, John Solomon and Carrie Johnson have a front page article that begins, “The FBI illegally collected more than 2,000 U.S. telephone call records between 2002 and 2006 by invoking terrorism emergencies that did not exist or simply persuading phone companies to provide records, according to internal bureau memos and interviews.”
“The Guantanamo ‘Suicides’: A Camp Delta sergeant blows the whistle.” Scott Horton will have this lengthy article in the March 2010 issue of Harper’s Magazine.
“At heart of Prop. 8 trial, a clash over motives”: Today’s edition of The Sacramento Bee contains a front page article that begins, “A majority of voters stopped same-sex marriage in California simply by casting a ballot for Proposition 8. This week, when a federal trial resumes in San Francisco, attorneys challenging Proposition 8 will continue building a multilayered argument that voters’ action created an unconstitutional law based on prejudice and unfounded fear about homosexuality.”
Today in The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko reports that “Prop. 8 trial looks at personal, social changes.”
The Associated Press has a report headlined “Same-sex marriage judge dealt with other gay cases” that begins, “The appointment of Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Richard Walker to the bench was held up for two years during the late 1980s in part because he had angered gay rights activists. Now, he is presiding over the most important gay civil rights case in a generation.”
And in The San Jose Mercury News, columnist Scott Herhold has an essay entitled “Supreme Court blows it with YouTube ruling in Prop. 8 case.”
“Reliving Horror in a Test for the Death Penalty”: This article appears today in The New York Times.
Today’s edition of The Hartford Courant contains an article headlined “Jury Selection Starts Today In Cheshire Slayings.”
And The New Haven Register reports that “Jury selection to begin in Petit slayings.”
“Life sentence for ex-China Supreme Court justice”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “A former Chinese Supreme Court judge was sentenced to life in prison Tuesday following his conviction for embezzlement and receiving more than half a million dollars in bribes.”
Shanghai Daily has a report headlined “Life for China’s corrupt ‘sex-hungry’ judge.”
The Telegraph (UK) has a news update headlined “Chinese Supreme Court judge sentenced to life in prison over land bribes; China has sentenced one its most senior judges to life imprisonment after convicting him of accepting massive bribes to make favourable rulings in a series of land deal cases.”
Bloomberg News reports that “China Sentences Former Supreme Court Official to Life in Jail.”
And Reuters reports that “China former senior judge jailed for graft.”
“Breyer, Scalia: Holding no punches; Separated by ideology and style, each justice often finds himself in the other’s line of fire.” Joan Biskupic has this article today in USA Today.
“Sex offenders behind bars: How long? Using the civil commitment process to lengthen a criminal sentence is dishonest and dangerous.” This editorial appears today in The Los Angeles Times.
And Tuesday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal will contain an editorial entitled “Predators and the Constitution: The feds usurp another area of state law.”
“Supreme Court weighs screening of child witnesses”: Canwest News Service has a report that begins, “Are child witnesses as good as their word? The Supreme Court of Canada will consider that question Tuesday when it weighs in on changes to the Canada Evidence Act, which permit children to tell their stories in court as long as they promise the judge they will tell the truth.”
“US investment banks divided over levy”: Tuesday’s edition of Financial Times will contain this article.
“A Bagram Reckoning”: Today’s edition of The New York Times contains an editorial that begins, “We keep waiting — in vain — for the Obama administration to stop trying to block judicial scrutiny of some of the Bush administration’s most outrageous policies on the detention of prisoners.”
“If Congress passes bill, court fight not far behind; Health reform: Can the government require you to buy insurance?” This article will appear Tuesday in The Salt Lake Tribune.
And in Tuesday’s edition of The Los Angeles Times, Tom Hamburger and James Oliphant will have an article headlined “Malpractice system survives healthcare overhaul intact; Democratic lawmakers were prepared to make concessions to Republicans on the subject; But after hard lobbying by trial lawyers and a series of party-line votes, little is likely to change.”
“Justices Better at Precedent Than Prescience”: Adam Liptak will have this new installment of his “Sidebar” column in Tuesday’s edition of The New York Times.
“Judge bans media from woman’s trial in Henry County”: This article appears today in The Toledo Blade.
“Prince recalls nations’ mutual ties”: Tuesday’s edition of The New Zealand Herald contains an article that begins, “Prince William has waxed lyrical about his fondness for New Zealand, but skirted away from the issue of republicanism in his speech at the opening of the new Supreme Court building.”
BBC News reports that “Prince William opens New Zealand court building.”
TVNZ reports that “Supreme Court finally gets new home.”
And New Zealand’s 3 News has a report headlined “Mixed reaction to new Supreme Court building.”
You can see photographs of the new home of the Supreme Court of New Zealand both here and here.
Welcome back: Today’s edition of The Great Falls Tribune contains an article headlined “The Cotters: Montana’s power couple” that begins, “When Michael Cotter first met his future bride at the University of Notre Dame School of Law in 1975, neither would have imagined that they were headed to the pinnacle of Montana’s legal world. Today the newly-minted Montana U.S. Attorney and his wife, Montana Supreme Court Justice Patricia Cotter, say they’re lucky to have built a loving family and successful legal careers together.”
“Dueling portraits of Prop. 8 backers at trial”: Bob Egelko has this article today in The San Francisco Chronicle.
“Practice Before the Office of the Solicitor General: Few Secret Meetings.” Tom Goldstein has this interesting post at “SCOTUSblog.”
“In Colorado, fighting to keep smoking onstage; Actors can’t smoke — even tobacco-free cigarettes — during a play, no matter how crucial smoking is to the script, the state’s high court rules; Two theater groups will continue to battle the ban”: This article will appear Monday in The Los Angeles Times.
“Wall St. Weighs a Constitutional Challenge to a Proposed Tax”: Monday’s edition of The New York Times will contain an article that begins, “Wall Street’s main lobbying arm has hired a top Supreme Court litigator to study a possible legal battle against a bank tax proposed by the Obama administration, on the theory that it would be unconstitutional, according to three industry executives briefed on the matter.”
“No Longer Their Golden Ticket”: This article about obtaining a law school degree appears today on the front page of the Sunday Styles section of The New York Times.
“Feingold fears corporate tsunami of campaign cash”: The Capital Times of Madison, Wisconsin has this report.
“U.S. Supreme Court: Throwing away the key for sex offenders?” Michael Kirkland of UPI has this report.
“Supreme Court to rule on famed death penalty case”: Reuters has a report that begins, “The U.S. Supreme Court is expected on Tuesday to issue its latest decision on the fate of Mumia Abu-Jamal, arguably America’s most famous death-row inmate, convicted of slaying a Philadelphia policeman, a crime he denies committing.”
“Gay marriage supporters fear Supreme Court’s ruling was an omen; When justices intervened to stop proceedings from airing online, some saw sympathy for supporters of Proposition 8 – and a lack of faith in the district judge who will first decide the measure’s fate”: David G. Savage has this article today in The Los Angeles Times. Meanwhile, in yesterday’s newspaper, columnist Tim Rutten had an op-ed entitled “Behind the Prop. 8 cameras: By barring the broadcasting of the case, the Supreme Court has seemingly signaled its views of same-sex marriage.”
The Ventura County Star reports today that “Court case blogs have many hooked; Federal gay marriage trial intensely covered online.”
The New York Times contains an article headlined “Newsom Is Eclipsed in Marriage Movement” and an op-ed by columnist Maureen Dowd entitled “An Odd Couple Defends Couples That Some (Oddly) Find Odd.”
And Dan Levine of The Recorder reports that “A Large Cast Shares Spotlight at Proposition 8 Trial.”
