Idaho Supreme Court won’t reconsider death row clemency case
United States Courts
The Idaho Supreme Court says it will not reconsider the clemency case of a terminally ill man who is facing execution for his role in the 1985 slayings of two gold prospectors near McCall.
The high court made the decision Friday in Gerald Ross Pizzuto Jr.’s case. The decision means the state remains free to seek a death warrant for Pizzuto. Once issued, the warrant would set Pizzuto’s execution by lethal injection in the next 30 days.
Deborah A. Czuba, the head of the Federal Defender Services of Idaho’s capital case unit, said in a prepared statement that the Idaho Supreme Court decision was disappointing.
“There is still time for Gov. Brad Little to accept the recommendation of his parole commissioners and let Mr. Pizzuto die a natural death in prison,” Czuba said. “If not, our hope is that the State will have enough grace to wait at least until after the Thanksgiving and Christmas season before making Department of Correction employees participate in a needless and traumatizing execution during the holidays.”
Pizzuto has spent more than three decades on death row and was originally scheduled to be put to death in June of 2021. He asked for clemency last year because he has terminal bladder cancer, heart disease, diabetes and decreased intellectual function.
The Idaho Commission of Pardons and Parole voted 4-3 to recommend that his sentence be changed to life in prison, citing the torture and abuse he experienced as a child and his health problems. But Idaho Gov. Brad Little rejected the recommendation, noting the brutal nature of Pizzuto’s crimes and pointing out that the slayings occurred shortly after Pizzuto was released from prison after serving time for rape.
Pizzuto’s attorneys appealed the matter to the Idaho Supreme Court, contending that the governor lacked the authority to reject the commission’s recommendation. But the high court ruled in August that the governor’s decision to overrule the recommendation was legal.
Related listings
-
Japan high court rejects paternity harassment allegations
United States Courts 06/23/2022A Japanese High Court on Thursday rejected an appeal by a former brokerage manager alleging on-the-job harassment and unlawful dismissal after he took parental leave while working at Mitsubishi UFJ Morgan Stanley.The case of Glen Wood, a Canadian who...
-
U.S. Courts of Appeals
United States Courts 07/30/2017There are 13 appellate courts that sit below the U.S. Supreme Court, and they are called the U.S. Courts of Appeals. The 94 federal judicial districts are organized into 12 regional circuits, each of which has a court of appeals. The appellate ...
-
U.S. Supreme Court
United States Courts 07/30/2017U.S. Supreme Court The Supreme Court is the final judge in all cases involving laws of Congress, and the highest law of all — the Constitution. The Supreme Court, however, is far from all-powerful. Its power is limited by the other two branches...

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.