Court: Exonerated inmate doesn't get $14 million
Legal News Center
The Supreme Court has overturned a $14 million judgment given to a former death row inmate who accused New Orleans prosecutors of withholding evidence in order to help convict him of murder.
John Thompson had successfully sued the district attorney's office, arguing that former District Attorney Harry Connick showed deliberate indifference by not providing adequate training for assistant district attorneys.
Prosecutors did not turn over a crime lab report that indicated Thompson's blood type did not match the perpetrator in an attempted robbery in 1985. Prosecutors used that conviction to get the death penalty in another case Thompson was involved in.
Prosecutors normally have immunity for their actions while working, but Thompson had convinced a jury there had not been enough training on evidence handling. The court overturned that decision.
Related listings
-
Oregon appeals court: Teeth not dangerous weapon
Legal News Center 03/24/2011The Oregon Court of Appeals has ruled that teeth are not a dangerous weapon.The decision Wednesday overturned a first-degree assault conviction for a Marion County man who bit off part of a neighbor's ear in 2008 in a drunken fight.The Oregonian repo...
-
NY top court weighs sex offender's return home
Legal News Center 03/22/2011New York's top court will decide whether a convicted sex offender's return home constitutes child neglect by him and his wife even though there was no evidence he did anything inappropriate with his children.The Court of Appeals is set to hear argume...
-
Trial Starts in Alleged Obama-Inspired Church Fire
Legal News Center 03/21/2011A federal court jury in Massachusetts will be hearing opening arguments in the trial of a man charged with burning down a predominantly black church in Springfield because he was upset that Barack Obama was elected president.Opening arguments are set...
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.