Kansas court avoids ruling on execution for student's death
Legal Compliance
The Kansas Supreme Court has postponed a decision on whether the state can execute a man convicted of kidnapping, raping and
strangling a 19-year-old college student.
The high court on Friday upheld the capital murder conviction of Justin Eugene Thurber but returned his case to a lower court for another
review of whether he's developmentally disabled.
The U.S. Supreme Court has deemed it unconstitutional to execute defendants with even mild developmental disabilities.
Thurber was sentenced to lethal injection for the January 2007 killing of Jodi Sanderholm. She was a pre-pharmacy student and dance
team member at Cowley College.
The trial judge rejected the defense's request for a hearing on whether Thurber is developmentally disabled, ruling that the defense
hadn't presented enough evidence to warrant it.
Related listings
-
Former Georgia insurance commissioner John Oxendine pleads guilty
Legal Compliance 03/26/2024A former Georgia insurance commissioner who made a failed Republican run for governor has pleaded guilty to conspiring to commit health care fraud.John W. Oxendine of Johns Creek entered the guilty plea Friday in federal court in Atlanta. The 61-year...
-
Trump wants N.Y. hush money trial to wait for Supreme Court immunity ruling
Legal Compliance 03/11/2024Donald Trump is seeking to delay his March 25 hush money trial until the Supreme Court rules on the presidential immunity claims he raised in another of his criminal cases.The Republican former president’s lawyers on Monday asked Manhattan Judg...
-
Hong Kong court affirms landmark sedition conviction for pro-democracy activist
Legal Compliance 03/07/2024Criticizing laws or chanting anti-government slogans can be enough to jail someone for sedition in Hong Kong, an appeal court ruled Thursday in a landmark case brought under a colonial-era law increasingly used to crush dissent.Tam Tak-chi, the first...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.