"Linda D. Misek-Falkoff, Ph.D., J.D." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Hi Sue and others - yes I agree with you, but a dissent is a losing position for the case itself, although later cases may prefer to cite it as precedential. These 'form-over-substance' like cases are IMHO disturbing. A man's life at stake. I think its sad. It illustrates for me something I believe strongly: the lower courts are really the controlling courts. If actions are not taken in the lower courts, the upper courts don't allow amendation. I think we concur, but look forward to others' posts. :) LDMF. ----------------------------Sue Hartigan wrote:------------------------- > > Sue Hartigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Hi Dr. L. > > That was what I wanted to ask you. If one or more of the Justices > dissents, isn't a stay granted. Obviously not. :( > > This man *was* executed. But from what I could get out of this, (and it > isn't easy for me:), is that one justice thought that the governor > should hold off until everything could go through the courts, but they > couldn't tell him to do so. Another one felt that the Vienna Convention > was violated, but didn't have the papers and such to know. > > I think that a temporary stay should have been given to make time for > all the questions to be answered. Because the State of Virginia went > ahead and executed this man, now even if his rights were violated, it's > too late. > > Sue > > Hi Sue, thank you for posting this case on procedural default, where the > > high Court felt that the issue of the Vienna Treaty had not been > > preserved because not raised in the lower courts (check me out). I vote > > that if there is a dissent (or are dissents) in capital cases a stay of > > execution would result. That do you think? :) LDMF. > > -- > Two rules in life: > > 1. Don't tell people everything you know. > 2. > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: L&I Supreme Court, Angel Francisco Breard/Sue
Linda D. Misek-Falkoff, Ph.D., J.D. Mon, 20 Apr 1998 21:53:22 -0400
- L&I Supreme Court, Angel Francisco... Sue Hartigan
- Re: L&I Supreme Court, Angel ... Linda D. Misek-Falkoff, Ph.D., J.D.
- Re: L&I Supreme Court, An... Sue Hartigan
- Re: L&I Supreme Court... Linda D. Misek-Falkoff, Ph.D., J.D.
- Re: L&I Supreme Court, An... Jackie Fellows
- Re: L&I Supreme Court... Sue Hartigan
- Re: L&I Supreme C... Jackie Fellows
- Re: L&I Supr... Sue Hartigan
