Court will hear appeal by Tenn. death row inmate
Lawyer Blogs
The Supreme Court is stepping into the case of a convicted murderer who claims authorities concealed evidence that might have spared him a death sentence.
The justices have twice before reinstated the death sentence for Gary Bradford Cone, who was convicted of beating an elderly couple to death in Memphis during a robbery.
Cone acknowledged that he killed the couple, but said he was temporarily insane because of drugs and the stress of his wartime Vietnam experiences.
He argued that state and federal courts never considered his claims that the state withheld evidence of his drug use. A panel of the Cincinnati-based 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 that Cone's plea had no merit. The dissenting judge said Cone's claims were never fairly considered by either state or federal courts.
The appeals court had twice before issued rulings favorable to Cone, but was overruled each time by the Supreme Court.
Related listings
-
SF court protects privacy of work communications
Lawyer Blogs 06/20/2008A federal appeals court has made it more difficult for employers to legally snoop on their workers' e-mails and text messages sent on company accounts.Under a Wednesday ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, employers that contract an outsi...
-
Court sides with employee in benefits case
Lawyer Blogs 06/19/2008[##_1L|1235780052.jpg|width="131" height="91" alt=""|_##]The Supreme Court said Thursday that courts should consider an insurance company's potential conflict of interest when reviewing the denial of an employee's health or disability benefits claim....
-
Texas court orders execution warrant reinstated
Lawyer Blogs 06/18/2008A former topless-club bouncer condemned for a double slaying almost 20 years ago is waiting in a Texas cell not far from the death chamber as his appeals play out in the courts.Charles Dean Hood initially won a reprieve just over an hour before he co...
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.