Prominent state challenges to lethal injection
Lawyer Blogs
Here are some states where there have been recent high-profile challenges to the lethal-injection death penalty method:
California: A federal judge has suspended executions until prison officials fix the deficiencies he identified in the lethal-injection process.
Maryland: Executions were halted in June as new execution protocols submitted by Gov. Martin O'Malley are examined by a legislative panel. O'Malley, a death penalty opponent, waited to submit the new rules in a failed attempt to give the Legislature time to repeal the death penalty.
Missouri: The execution process resumed this year for the first time in nearly four years but was stalled in June when the state's chief justice said the court was unlikely to schedule any future executions until legal challenges were resolved over the training and competence of the state's execution team.
Arizona: Executions have been on hold since 2007 as the U.S. Supreme Court reviewed Kentucky's lethal-injection method. Kentucky's plan was approved, but the high court didn't rule on methods in other states. Federal public defenders in Phoenix then questioned Arizona's methods in state and federal court.
Tennessee: A federal appeals court delivered a victory for the state's lethal-injection method in July after executions had been held up for years by an inmate's lawsuit contending it inflicted unnecessary pain.
Related listings
-
Dozens of Gitmo detainees finally get day in court
Lawyer Blogs 11/16/2009In courtrooms barred to the public, dozens of terror suspects are pleading for their freedom from the Guantanamo Bay prison, sometimes even testifying on their own behalf by video from the U.S. naval base in Cuba.Complying with a Supreme Court ruling...
-
Lawyer: FBI asked terror suspect to be informant
Lawyer Blogs 11/13/2009A Massachusetts man accused of plotting to kill Americans was portrayed by federal prosecutors Thursday as a jihadist who is too dangerous to be released on bail, but the man's lawyer said he was charged only after he refused to become an FBI informa...
-
W.Va. Supreme Court opts for e-mail privacy
Lawyer Blogs 11/13/2009The state Supreme Court has ruled that public officials and public employees can keep their personal e-mails private.The court ruled 4-1 Thursday that none of the 13 e-mails between former Supreme Court Chief Justice Elliott "Spike" Maynard and Masse...
Illinois Work Injury Lawyers – Krol, Bongiorno & Given, LTD.
Accidents in the workplace are often caused by unsafe work conditions arising from ignoring safety rules, overlooking maintenance or other negligence of those in management. While we are one of the largest firms in Illinois dedicated solely to the representation of injured workers, we pride ourselves on the personal, one-on-one approach we deliver to each client.
Work accidents can cause serious injuries and sometimes permanent damage. Some extremely serious work injuries can permanently hinder a person’s ability to get around and continue their daily duties. Factors that affect one’s quality of life such as place of work, relationships with friends and family, and social standing can all be taken away quickly by a work injury. Although, you may not be able to recover all of your losses, you may be entitled to compensation as a result of your work injury. Krol, Bongiorno & Given, LTD. provides informed advocacy in all kinds of workers’ compensation claims, including:
• Injuries to the back and neck, including severe spinal cord injuries
• Serious head injuries
• Heart problems resulting from workplace activities
• Injuries to the knees, elbows, shoulders and other joints
• Injuries caused by repetitive movements
For Illinois Workers’ Compensation claims, you will ALWAYS cheat yourself if you do not hire an experienced attorney. When you hire Krol, Bongiorno & Given, Ltd, you will have someone to guide you through the process, and when it is time to settle, we will add value to your case IN EXCESS of our fee. In the last few years, employers and insurance carriers have sought to advance the argument that when you settle a case without an attorney, your already low settlement should be further reduced by 20% so that you do not get a “windfall.” Representing yourself in Illinois is a lose-lose proposition.