Court mulls if Jefferson indictment is tainted
Lawyer Blogs
A Louisiana congressman accused of taking bribes challenged his indictment before a federal appeals court Wednesday, claiming grand jury testimony infringed on his constitutionally protected activities.
Democratic U.S. Rep. William Jefferson's attorney told a three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that a congressional aide's testimony about Jefferson's leadership in passing trade legislation benefiting African nations violated the Constitution's speech or debate clause.
The clause says congressmen "shall not be questioned in any other Place" for speech or debate associated with their legislative actions. A federal judge in February refused to dismiss the indictment. Jefferson, who faces up to 235 years in prison if convicted of bribery and other charges, appealed.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Mark Lytle told the appeals court judges that U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III got it right when he ruled that Jefferson's lawyers sought to apply the clause so broadly that it would make it virtually impossible to ever charge a congressman with a crime.
Jefferson's attorney, Robert P. Trout, contended the testimony about how the congressman gained influence with African leaders was at the heart of the government's case. Trout said one of the ways Jefferson gained that influence, according to grand jury testimony, was through leadership on the trade legislation.
The appeals court judges vigorously questioned Lytle and Trout for about 50 minutes, focusing on whether the indictment was tainted if prosecutors neither sought nor relied on the testimony cited by Jefferson.
Lytle said the aide volunteered the information in question, which amounted to just four lines in a massive set of grand jury transcripts.
Related listings
-
Amid financial crisis, Stevens asks to skip trial
Lawyer Blogs 09/24/2008As Congress rushed to stop a meltdown in the U.S. financial market, the Senate's senior Republican told a federal judge Tuesday that he might need to skip out of his corruption trial from time to time this week.Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens said he underst...
-
Illinois' top court denies appeal in Sprint case
Lawyer Blogs 09/24/2008The Illinois Supreme Court has dealt Sprint Nextel Corp. another setback in its fight with affiliate iPCS Inc. over the Nextel network.The court on Wednesday refused to hear Sprint's appeal of a March ruling by the Appellate Court of Illinois that wo...
-
Stevens asks to skip court during financial mess
Lawyer Blogs 09/23/2008With Congress rushing to stop a meltdown in the U.S. financial market, Sen. Ted Stevens asked a federal judge Tuesday to let him skip out of his corruption trial from time to time.The Senate's longest-serving Republican, Stevens is fighting charges t...
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.