843 users online (71 members and 772 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 165
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    SK, Canada
    Posts
    3,943
    Quote Originally Posted by Karinna View Post
    I was wondering what an En Banc determination was all about and this is what constitutes En Banc
    (quote)
    Rule 35. En Banc Determination

    (a) When Hearing or Rehearing En Banc May Be Ordered. A majority of the circuit judges who are in regular active service and who are not disqualified may order that an appeal or other proceeding be heard or reheard by the court of appeals en banc. An en banc hearing or rehearing is not favored and ordinarily will not be ordered unless:

    (1) en banc consideration is necessary to secure or maintain uniformity of the court's decisions; or

    (2) the proceeding involves a question of exceptional importance.
    https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frap/rule_35

    So would the State even qualify for this determination? I don't think they do.
    BBM

    I think it depends on who you ask Karinna lol If you asked the 2 judges that sided with BD, probably not, but ask the 1 that didn't... he would probably say it does!

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    4,870
    Quote Originally Posted by missy1974 View Post
    BBM

    I think it depends on who you ask Karinna lol If you asked the 2 judges that sided with BD, probably not, but ask the 1 that didn't... he would probably say it does!
    Yes of course the judge that voted to uphold BD's conviction would say it does. But there is a standard to be met for such a hearing and i guess it remains to be seen.
    *FREE LEONARD PELTIER*
    Justice for an innocent man.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    4,870
    (quote)
    Writs of Certiorari

    Parties who are not satisfied with the decision of a lower court must petition the U.S. Supreme Court to hear their case. The primary means to petition the court for review is to ask it to grant a writ of certiorari. This is a request that the Supreme Court order a lower court to send up the record of the case for review. The Court usually is not under any obligation to hear these cases, and it usually only does so if the case could have national significance, might harmonize conflicting decisions in the federal Circuit courts, and/or could have precedential value. In fact, the Court accepts 100-150 of the more than 7,000 cases that it is asked to review each year. Typically, the Court hears cases that have been decided in either an appropriate U.S. Court of Appeals or the highest Court in a given state (if the state court decided a Constitutional issue).

    The Supreme Court has its own set of rules. According to these rules, four of the nine Justices must vote to accept a case. Five of the nine Justices must vote in order to grant a stay, e.g., a stay of execution in a death penalty case. Under certain instances, one Justice may grant a stay pending review by the entire Court.
    http://www.uscourts.gov/about-federa...rces/supreme-1
    *FREE LEONARD PELTIER*
    Justice for an innocent man.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    4,870
    IMO the benchmark for the Supreme Court to accept this case would be very high after a Federal court has made a decision.
    *FREE LEONARD PELTIER*
    Justice for an innocent man.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Left Coast US of A
    Posts
    417
    Quote Originally Posted by krkrjx View Post
    I am expecting the state to say they will retry Dassey, then drag the process out as long as they possibly can just to keep him incarcerated.

    They have 90 days to file their intent but I am not sure what the court will accept as grounds for retrial. They can't use his coerced confession and if they have no evidence of his involvement the court should deny their request for retrial. But what should be isn't always what is.

    What evidence could they claim to have?
    Given the way the team investigating Steven appeared to keep pulling evidence out of their hats as needed, I'm wary of what might happen in this regard.

    On the other hand - unlike the first go-round - this time they must be aware the whole world is watching.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    SK, Canada
    Posts
    3,943
    Kachinsky's douchey-ness just never ends.

    http://www.wearegreenbay.com/news/lo...case/748777276

    "I can't be a full advocate for Dassey at this point, but I would expect the full panel of the 7th Circuit is going to want to take a look at the case," Kachinsky said.

    Drizin tweeted the above link with the comment... Really? Were you ever a "full advocate" for BD?

    Drizin also points out the comments from people on the street.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Chicagoland
    Posts
    3,310
    For those waiting on hearing about whether BD is getting out today, here is the State's response to the request to release BD.

    This Court should deny the motion to lift the stay. If, however, this Court chooses to dissolve the stay, the State respectfully requests that any such order not take effect until the en banc court has the full opportunity to rule on a motion by the State to reinstate the stay pending resolution of this appeal.

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-A...lUMHg1YlU/view

    Awaiting the court ruling....
    Pedant here, please share your sources. TIA

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Chicagoland
    Posts
    3,310
    “Indeed, the only changed circumstance that Dassey can point to is the Merits Panel’s decision itself. But, of course, that sharply divided decision does not “resol[ve] this appeal,” Dkt. 22:2, as the State still has the right to petition for en banc review, and if it cannot obtain relief en banc, to seek Supreme Court review. The State intends to begin this process promptly, and will petition for en banc review within the 14-day window provided by this Court’s rules. Respect for the en banc (and possible Supreme Court) process, the Motions Panel’s well-considered stay decision, the powerful dissenting opinion from the Merits Panel’s holding, and the conclusion by a Wisconsin jury that Dassey committed heinous crimes all strongly militate against lifting the stay,” the state wrote.

    More from the State's motion...

    http://fox6now.com/2017/06/26/state-keep-brendan-dassey-in-prison-while-entire-court-reviews-case/
    Pedant here, please share your sources. TIA

  9. #39
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    6,493
    How can the state continue harping on "the conclusion by a Wisconsin jury that Dassey committed heinous crimes..." in each motion they file and every statement they make?

    Higher courts have overturned said conclusion; one would think it would be a major insult to those courts for the state to insinuate that an overturned jury's decision speaks louder than the ruling of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    SK, Canada
    Posts
    3,943
    Quote Originally Posted by BigCityAccountant View Post
    “Indeed, the only changed circumstance that Dassey can point to is the Merits Panel’s decision itself. But, of course, that sharply divided decision does not “resol[ve] this appeal,” Dkt. 22:2, as the State still has the right to petition for en banc review, and if it cannot obtain relief en banc, to seek Supreme Court review. The State intends to begin this process promptly, and will petition for en banc review within the 14-day window provided by this Court’s rules. Respect for the en banc (and possible Supreme Court) process, the Motions Panel’s well-considered stay decision, the powerful dissenting opinion from the Merits Panel’s holding, and the conclusion by a Wisconsin jury that Dassey committed heinous crimes all strongly militate against lifting the stay,” the state wrote.

    More from the State's motion...

    http://fox6now.com/2017/06/26/state-keep-brendan-dassey-in-prison-while-entire-court-reviews-case/
    BBM and enlarged

    let's look at that well-considered stay decision, it must have been really riveting.

    http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-co...ay-Release.pdf

    1. RESPONDENT‐APPELLANT’S EMERGENCY MOTION TO STAY THE
    DISTRICT COURT’S ORDER RELEASING PRISONER, filed on November 16, 2016,
    by counsel for the appellant.

    2. RESPONSE OF PETITIONER‐APPELLEE IN OPPOSITION TO RESPONDENT‐
    APPELLANT’S EMERGENCY MOTION TO STAY THE DISTRICT COURT’S
    ORDER RELEASING PRISONER, filed on November 16, 2016, by counsel for the
    appellee.

    IT IS ORDERED that the appellantʹs motion to stay is GRANTED. The district courtʹs
    order releasing appellee Brendan Dassey is STAYED pending resolution of this appeal




    No need to click the link. That is the whole decision above. uh huh... well considered.


  11. #41
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Left Coast US of A
    Posts
    417
    Quote Originally Posted by BigCityAccountant View Post
    For those waiting on hearing about whether BD is getting out today, here is the State's response to the request to release BD.

    This Court should deny the motion to lift the stay. If, however, this Court chooses to dissolve the stay, the State respectfully requests that any such order not take effect until the en banc court has the full opportunity to rule on a motion by the State to reinstate the stay pending resolution of this appeal.

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-A...lUMHg1YlU/view

    Awaiting the court ruling....
    I think in the end a lot of powerful people in Wisconsin will be sorry Manitowoc didn't just bit the bullet and endured Steven's lawsuit.

    If we get Zellner in front of the United States Supreme Court, this will become an even bigger story than it was - instead of being remembered as a show on cable that was popular in 2016.
    Last edited by proudfootz; 06-26-2017 at 08:53 PM. Reason: missing key word. Manitowoc did not bite the bullet

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    SK, Canada
    Posts
    3,943
    Quote Originally Posted by krkrjx View Post
    How can the state continue harping on "the conclusion by a Wisconsin jury that Dassey committed heinous crimes..." in each motion they file and every statement they make?

    Higher courts have overturned said conclusion; one would think it would be a major insult to those courts for the state to insinuate that an overturned jury's decision speaks louder than the ruling of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.
    I agree. There are 3 judges now that have picked that confession (along with some of his others in less detail) apart, they are calling it BS, yet the State can still call him a murderer and rapist? I don't get it.

  13. #43
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    6,493
    I don't get it either. They use it as a point of contention for not releasing BD from prison as ordered by Duffin, an order which the 7th Circuit has now upheld.

    IMO, it makes the state look like desperate fools using his previous conviction as their argument to the courts....the very conviction that has been overturned by the courts.

    I see their desperation for what it is but what I don't get is how it can be effective for purposes of the stay. The CoA needs to rule that the state has not shown proof of their claims that BD is a dangerous man. I admit I am impatient but given he has been imprisoned for over a decade we need him freed sooner rather than later.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    4,870
    How does this qualify for En Banc hearing? Where is the question of exceptional importance?
    *FREE LEONARD PELTIER*
    Justice for an innocent man.

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Chicagoland
    Posts
    3,310
    Quote Originally Posted by Karinna View Post
    How does this qualify for En Banc hearing? Where is the question of exceptional importance?
    I believe it is of exceptional importance! I believe Dassey will prevail. Read LN's twitter post. This is why I think this is of exceptional importance and apparently she does too.

    Attached Images Attached Images
    Pedant here, please share your sources. TIA

Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Circuit Judge Richard Albritton, 57 May Be Benched
    By sharon25 in forum Bizarre and Off-Beat News
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-24-2005, 12:35 AM