Supreme Court rules against Nev. man in DNA case
Court Alerts
A Nevada inmate lost a U.S. Supreme Court bid to challenge what jurors were told about DNA evidence against him in the 1994 sexual assault of a 9-year-old girl.
The nation's highest court ruled Monday that it would not hear the evidence issue but did give Troy Don Brown, 38, another chance to argue before a federal appeals court that he received ineffective legal representation at trial.
State Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto called the Supreme Court ruling a victory for prosecutors and Nevada after they lost arguments about the DNA evidence in lower courts.
Paul Turner, an assistant federal public defender in Las Vegas handling Brown's appeals, has argued that the conviction should be overturned if the DNA evidence was insufficient.
The high court did not hear oral arguments before reversing a Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that an analysis of DNA evidence overstated the likelihood that body fluids found at the rape scene were from Brown.
The Supreme Court pointed to an evidence standard set in a 1979 case calling for courts to consider all the evidence in a case, not just evidence being challenged.
At trial in Elko County, the chief of the Washoe County crime lab testified the chance that Brown's DNA matched the DNA found at the rape scene was 99.99967 percent.
The witness also told jurors that one in three million people randomly selected from the population would also match that DNA.
Related listings
-
High court pulls plug on YouTube trial coverage
Court Alerts 01/12/2010For now, the only way Californians can watch the trial over the constitutionality of the state's ban on same-sex marriage is to take a trip to the federal courthouse on Golden Gate Avenue in San Francisco.Just an hour before the trial got under way M...
-
Net Neutrality Faces Appeals Court
Court Alerts 01/11/2010The FCC and Comcast got their day in court Friday afternoon on the net neutrality issue. A three-judge federal appeals court followed a line of questioning that seemed to favor Comcast, but a decision may not come for months. The issue is whether Com...
-
Court Rules in Favor of Octuplets Mom Suleman
Court Alerts 01/09/2010A California appeals court ruled in favor of octuplets mother Nadya Suleman Friday, denying a call for an independent guardian to monitor her children's finances.The 4th District Court of Appeal in Santa Ana called the petition an "unprecedented, mer...
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.