U.S. appellate court overturns state murder conviction
Legal News Center
[##_1L|1042948632.jpg|width="180" height="128" alt=""|_##]A federal appeals court overturned a Santa Rosa woman's murder conviction Wednesday for killing a man during an attempted carjacking in 1996, saying she had been forced to go to trial with a lawyer she wanted to replace. Nicole Bradley was 18 when she and two juveniles were arrested for the fatal shooting of James Strickler Jr., 19, of Santa Rosa. The court said Bradley had shot Strickler unintentionally, but she was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to 35 years to life in prison for a homicide committed in the course of another felony.
Bradley's lawyer quit before the trial, and a Sonoma County judge appointed a replacement in a hearing from which Bradley and her chosen lawyer were excluded. When Bradley sought to dismiss the new lawyer because of conflicts, Superior Court Judge Knoel Owen refused, saying the trial had already been delayed by almost two years and it wasn't clear Bradley could pay for her own lawyer.
In Wednesday's 9-2 ruling granting Bradley a new trial, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco said nearly all the pretrial delays were the results of judges' decisions, not Bradley's.
Noting that Bradley's trial lawyer disagreed with her on a possible plea agreement and on whether she should testify, the court said the trial judge's decision had created an adversary relationship between lawyer and client.
Defense lawyer Dennis Riordan praised the ruling and said a new trial could result in a lesser conviction, for second-degree murder or manslaughter. Deputy Attorney General Gregory Ott, who represented the prosecution, said the court disregarded a federal law that requires federal judges to defer to state court rulings unless they are clearly wrong.
Related listings
-
Death penalty revoked in N.J.
Legal News Center 12/18/2007[##_1L|1078730658.jpg|width="140" height="105" alt=""|_##]New Jersey became the first state in decades yesterday to abolish the death penalty, giving hope to opponents of capital punishment that Maryland and other states could soon follow. But the ob...
-
Supreme Court rules on sentences
Legal News Center 12/16/2007[##_1L|1396992692.jpg|width="131" height="91" alt=""|_##]Advocates of greater fairness in criminal sentencing won an important battle at the U.S. Supreme Court last week. But they could lose the war if individual judges exploit the decision to return...
-
High court gives U.S. judges more freedom in sentencing
Legal News Center 12/11/2007The Supreme Court restored federal judges Monday to their traditional central role in criminal sentencing.In two decisions, the court said U.S. district judges have broad discretion to impose what they think are reasonable sentences, even if federal ...
Is Now the Time to Really Call a Special Education Lawyer?
IDEA, FAPE, CHILD FIND and IEPs: The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) guarantees all children with disabilities to a free appropriate public education (FAPE). FAPE starts with a school’s responsibility to identify that a child has a disability (Child Find) and create an Individualized Education Program (IEP) to suit the needs of the child.
Forte Law Group is one of only a very few law firms within the state of Connecticut that is dedicated to exclusively representing families and children with special needs.
Parents need to be persistent, dedicated and above all else aware of the many services and accommodations that their child is entitled to under the law. As early as this point within your child’s special education, many parents will often find themselves in the situation asking, “is now the time to really call a special education lawyer?” Here are a few things to consider when asking yourself that question.