Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

AP: (Supreme) Court Rules Against Death Row Inmate

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
Eugene Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-20-07 12:34 PM
Original message
AP: (Supreme) Court Rules Against Death Row Inmate
Court Rules Against Death Row Inmate

Tuesday February 20, 2007 5:01 PM

By PETE YOST

Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that a Florida death row prisoner
lost an opportunity to challenge his conviction in the federal court system because
he missed a one-year filing deadline.

In a 5-4 decision, the justices sided with the state of Florida against inmate Gary
Lawrence, who faces execution for murdering a man who had moved in with Lawrence's
wife.

Under the federal Anti-terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, death row
inmates have one year after a conviction becomes final in state courts to petition
the federal system to review the case.

Lawrence's lawyers say they stopped the clock from running on the state's one-year
time limit by petitioning the U.S. Supreme Court. A majority of the court rejected
that argument.

-snip-

Font size: http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6428169,00.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
sharp_stick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-20-07 12:42 PM
Response to Original message
1. Damn but we are a barbaric bunch in this country
Other than revenge I can't see much of a need for the death penalty.

One of the common tactics used in defending a death row prisoner is trying to run out the clock by waiting until the last minute to file appeals and the like. This is usually quite effective is adding years to an inmates life but it can really bite you in the ass when you miss a deadline.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0rganism Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-20-07 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
2. that sure puts the "dead" back in "deadline", don't it?
Yes, Virginia, sometimes your ass is on the line for the paperwork...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OneBlueSky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-20-07 01:05 PM
Response to Original message
3. these guys just define the term "compassionate justice," don't they? . . . n/t
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-20-07 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. Even Paul Wellstone voted for this law
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w4rma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-20-07 10:03 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. The law isn't the problem. Those 5 "conservatives'" interpretation of the law is the problem. (nt)
Edited on Tue Feb-20-07 10:03 PM by w4rma
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
951-Riverside Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-20-07 01:16 PM
Response to Original message
4. He should have murdered the wife too n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DIKB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-20-07 08:39 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. Her ONLY imo
Marital vows are "til death do us part" which would imply one of the couple dying. A 3rd party cannot be held to those vows. *Note* This is slightly in jest.

My attitude, as a straight guy, is that if another man messes around w/ any woman I'm with, I can't really blame him. Fidelity is HER responsibility, your average joe can't really be blamed for "getting what he can."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Benhurst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-20-07 01:19 PM
Response to Original message
5. The United States Supreme Court
What a sad, sorry, sick joke.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Olney Blue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-20-07 08:35 PM
Response to Original message
7. Is there a breakdown of the cast votes (not that I can't guess)?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
usregimechange Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-20-07 09:45 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. 5-4
Thomas, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Scalia, Kennedy, and Alito, JJ., joined. Ginsburg, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Stevens, Souter, and Breyer, JJ., joined.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Olney Blue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-20-07 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Failure is not an option for the Democrats in 2008.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
usregimechange Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-20-07 10:12 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Amen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 05:39 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC