The Supreme Court agreed Monday to consider whether someone convicted of murder can then offer evidence at sentencing time that casts doubt about culpability. Justices will hear Oregon's appeal of a lower ruling throwing out the sentence for Randy Guzek, who sought to introduce transcripts of testimony from witnesses that suggested he could not have been present at the crime scene, arguing it was "mitigating evidence" relevant to whether he should receive the death penalty.
April 26, 2005 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
The Supreme Court agreed Monday to consider whether someone convicted of murder can then offer evidence at sentencing time that casts doubt about culpability.
In their continuing review of death penalty issues, justices will hear Oregon’s appeal of a lower ruling throwing out the sentence for Randy Guzek. He and two other men were convicted in 1988 of killing a couple during a burglary attempt.
Presented by BigVoodoo
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
Atlanta s John Marshall Law School is seeking to hire one or more full-time, visiting Legal WritingInstructors to teach Legal Research, Anal...
Lower Manhattan firm seeks a premises liability litigator (i.e., depositions, SJ motions, and/or trials) with at least 3-6 years of experien...
Join the Mendocino County District Attorney s Office and work in Mendocino County home to redwoods, vineyards and picturesque coastline. ...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
