Ohio: Changes in execution process constitutional
Headline News
The deviations from official death penalty procedures made during an execution last year were minor changes that wouldn't cause pain to an inmate or violate his rights, the state said in a filing Friday seeking to overturn a judge's ruling that postponed next week's execution of a man who stabbed an elderly couple to death 25 years ago.
Attorneys for Charles Lorraine argued that the deviations were important enough to cause concern that Ohio was still not following its own rules for putting inmates to death.
U.S. District Court Judge Gregory Frost agreed, and on Wednesday stopped Lorraine's execution while acknowledging he didn't want to be micromanaging Ohio's death penalty processes.
Frost said the state failed to document the drugs used in its last execution in November and failed to review the medical chart of the inmate put to death.
Attorneys for the state had argued previously that the changes were negligible, and they said Friday the execution should proceed.
Related listings
-
Court rules against man convicted by eyewitness ID
Headline News 01/11/2012The Supreme Court declined Wednesday to extend constitutional safeguards against the use of some eyewitness testimony at criminal trials, despite concerns that eyewitness identification plays a key role in innocent people going to prison. In a case d...
-
Supreme Court rules in favor of arbitration
Headline News 01/10/2012The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that disputes between consumers and companies that issue low-rate credit cards to people with bad credit ratings can be handled in business-friendly arbitration, rather than federal court. The justices voted 8-1 to rev...
-
US judge tosses $322M asbestos lawsuit verdict
Headline News 01/03/2012A Mississippi judge has thrown out a $322 million lawsuit verdict that had been hailed as the largest asbestos award for a single plaintiff in U.S. history. The case began to unravel last year after defense lawyers asked the Mississippi Supreme Court...
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.