When Thomas Stark was tried for murder nine years ago in a Contra Costa County, Calif., courtroom, the judge told jurors to presume Stark was "conclusively sane" before deciding on his guilt or innocence. On Tuesday the 9th Circuit concluded that jury instruction violated Stark's due process rights, in a ruling that may grant Stark a release from prison. The unanimous decision marks the second time in six years that the 9th Circuit has ruled against a jury instruction that sets out a presumption of sanity.
August 03, 2006 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
When Thomas Stark was tried for murder nine years ago in a Contra Costa County, Calif., courtroom, the judge told jurors to presume Stark was “conclusively sane” before deciding on his guilt or innocence.
On Tuesday the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that jury instruction violated Stark’s due process rights, in a ruling that may grant Stark a release from prison.
Presented by BigVoodoo
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.
Consulting Magazine recognizes leaders in technology across three categories Leadership, Client Service and Innovation.
Atlanta s John Marshall Law School is seeking to hire one or more full-time, visiting Legal WritingInstructors to teach Legal Research, Anal...
Shipman is seeking an associate to join our Labor & Employment practice in our Hartford, New Haven, or Stamford office. Candidates shou...
Evergreen Trading is a media investment firm headquartered in NYC. We help brands achieve their goals by leveraging their unwanted assets to...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
