Court to decide on convict's right to test DNA
Court Alerts
The Supreme Court will decide whether, years after his conviction, a defendant has a constitutional right to test genetic evidence found at the crime scene.
The justices, in an order Monday, accepted the appeal of prosecutors in Alaska. They asked the court to overturn a federal appeals court ruling in favor of William Osborne, who was convicted of rape, kidnapping and assault in an attack on a prostitute in 1993.
The woman was raped at gunpoint, beaten with an ax handle, shot in the head and left for dead in a snow bank near the Anchorage International Airport.
Osborne admitted his guilt under oath to the parole board in 2004. Another man also convicted in the attack has repeatedly identified Osborne as having participated in the crimes. The testing would be done on a condom and hairs found by investigators.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in San Francisco, said Osborne has a right to subject the evidence to advanced DNA testing that was not available at the time of his trial.
Forty-four states and the federal government have laws that give convicts access to DNA testing, but Alaska does not.
Osborne urged the court to reject the appeal, saying that because so many states have laws on the topic, it rarely arises in federal court.
Prosecutors argued that even if testing determines that the hairs and sperm are not Osborne's, other evidence introduced at his trial is sufficient to leave his conviction in place. That matter is not before the high court.
The case is District Attorney's Office v. Osborne, 08-6.
Related listings
-
Lawyer defends actions of mother in Nev. abduction
Court Alerts 11/05/2008The mother of a 6-year-old boy who was abducted from her home this month had gone to police after she got a warning note in July but was told that there was no imminent threat and that she should buy a shotgun, her lawyer said Thursday.Lawyer Dennis ...
-
Court weighs amputee's case; limits on drug suits
Court Alerts 11/03/2008The Supreme Court appeared likely Monday to decide an amputee's lawsuit against a drug maker based on how much federal regulators knew about an anti-nausea drug's risks in the event of a botched injection.Several justices indicated that if the U.S. F...
-
Court won't review Golden Venture smuggling case
Court Alerts 11/02/2008A woman convicted for her role in a smuggling conspiracy that ended with the deaths of 10 Chinese immigrants has lost a Supreme Court appeal.Cheng Chui Ping, better known by her nickname, Sister Ping, was sentenced to 35 years in prison, for heading ...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.