Monday at the Supreme Court: Today, SCOTUSblog has two posts addressing cases that will be argued at the Supreme Court on Monday. In one post, Harvard Law School student Kate Wevers previews Holland v. Florida (09-5327), a capital case addressing whether AEDPA's one-year time limit can be equitably tolled when the petition is not timely filed if the prisoner alleges the delay was caused by the "gross negligence" of his lawyer. Wever's post details the procedural history of the case, and briefly describes the arguments made by the Florida Attorney General, Holland, and Holland's amici. Wever's post omits the fact that in 1990 witnesses saw Holland brutally beat a woman to the point of unconsciousness and shoot the police officer who tried to stop him. The post also fails to mention the arguments made by amici on behalf of the Respondent. Amicus briefs for the State of Texas, et. al., and the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation are available here and here. In another SCOTUSblog post, Anna Christensen mentions that Berghuis v. Thompkins (08-1470) will be argued on Monday. She then links to Charles Weisselberg's Huffington Post critique of the Obama administration's position in the case. According to Weisselberg the Administration's stance is "more hostile to Miranda than any taken in the Supreme Court by previous Democratic Administrations." The S.G.'s brief is available here, and CJLF's brief in Thompkins is available here.
Was It Acceptable to Sentence a Drug Cartel Chief in Private?: At Sentencing Law and Policy, Doug Berman posts links to recent media coverage of the "super-secret" sentencing proceedings of Osiel Cárdenas Guillén, the head of the Gulf Cartel, which controls much of the cocaine traffic across the border in South Texas. According to a New York Times article by James C. McKinley, Jr., Cárdenas Guillén pleaded guilty to drug dealing, money laundering and the attempted murder and assault of federal agents, and was sentenced 25 years in federal prison. An editorial in the Houston Chronicle criticizes the private sentencing procedures, and argues that handling the sentencing through closed hearings and sealed documents "is unacceptable." The editorial argues that the public should have had access to the sentencing, and "[a]t a minimum,...should be entitled to an explanation of why secrecy is being granted."
The Liu Nomination: Earlier today, Kent had a post discussing the death penalty views of Ninth Circuit judicial nominee Professor Goodwin Liu. At Volokh Conspiracy, David Kopel provides information regarding Liu's views on firearms policy. Apparently in a 2003 Georgetown Law Journal article, Liu and co-author Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton criticized recent Supreme Court decisions declaring two federal gun control laws unconstitutional. Liu and Clinton did not like that activists judges were overturning gun laws created by Congress, and argued that the decisions "underscore how important it is that we in the Senate diligently exercise our constitutional duty to scrutinize judicial nominees--including nominees to the lower federal courts." Ed Whelan has multiple posts on Liu at Bench Memos.
Was It Acceptable to Sentence a Drug Cartel Chief in Private?: At Sentencing Law and Policy, Doug Berman posts links to recent media coverage of the "super-secret" sentencing proceedings of Osiel Cárdenas Guillén, the head of the Gulf Cartel, which controls much of the cocaine traffic across the border in South Texas. According to a New York Times article by James C. McKinley, Jr., Cárdenas Guillén pleaded guilty to drug dealing, money laundering and the attempted murder and assault of federal agents, and was sentenced 25 years in federal prison. An editorial in the Houston Chronicle criticizes the private sentencing procedures, and argues that handling the sentencing through closed hearings and sealed documents "is unacceptable." The editorial argues that the public should have had access to the sentencing, and "[a]t a minimum,...should be entitled to an explanation of why secrecy is being granted."
The Liu Nomination: Earlier today, Kent had a post discussing the death penalty views of Ninth Circuit judicial nominee Professor Goodwin Liu. At Volokh Conspiracy, David Kopel provides information regarding Liu's views on firearms policy. Apparently in a 2003 Georgetown Law Journal article, Liu and co-author Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton criticized recent Supreme Court decisions declaring two federal gun control laws unconstitutional. Liu and Clinton did not like that activists judges were overturning gun laws created by Congress, and argued that the decisions "underscore how important it is that we in the Senate diligently exercise our constitutional duty to scrutinize judicial nominees--including nominees to the lower federal courts." Ed Whelan has multiple posts on Liu at Bench Memos.
Leave a comment