Consumer Attorney Attorneys Directory Cities we Work in States We work in Contact Us  

Consumer Attorneys

High Court Adds Death-Penalty And Tobacco Cases to Docket


The Supreme Court added four cases to its docket for the current term yesterday, including a review of a judge’s decision to dismiss a potential juror from a death-penalty case because of the man’s equivocal statements about capital punishment.

A federal appeals court overturned the trial judge’s ruling in a rape and murder trial in the state of Washington. One of the issues in the case is whether federal courts should defer to a trial judge who is in a position to actually talk to and observe a potential juror in making the decision about his ability to carry out the law.
The court has added 11 cases to its slimmer-than-usual caseload in the past eight days, all of which are scheduled to be argued and decided before the term’s usual close at the end of June. Among the cases justices said yesterday that they will decide is a question of whether a cigarette manufacturer can move a lawsuit against it to federal jurisdiction and out of the state courts, where judgments against tobacco companies have been mounting.

The death-penalty case , Uttecht v. Brown (06-413), stems from the 1991 conviction of Cal Coburn Brown. One of the prospective jurors in the case indicated on a questionnaire that he could support a death sentence if convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that the accused had killed and would kill again, and that he would have severe doubts without that. Because the only other alternative sentence for Brown would be life in prison without parole, he was told it would be unlikely such evidence would be presented.

After additional questioning, the prosecution asked that the juror be dismissed, and the defense did not object. The Washington state Supreme Court and a federal district judge upheld the state judge’s decision to dismiss.

But the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, with which the Supreme Court has already disagreed on a death-penalty case this year, reversed the sentence. The potential juror’s statement that he “would impose the death penalty when the defendant would be likely to kill again did not exclude the possibility that he would vote to impose the death penalty in other circumstances as well,” the court ruled.



Our Attorney Network
Accident Admiralty Adoption Arbitration Asbestos Bankruptcy
Business Child Civil Consumer Criminal Discrimination
Divorce Drug Dui Dwi Estate Planning Family
Federal Immigration Injury Insurance Juvenile Labor
Lemon Law Litigation Maritime
Medical Malpractice Mesothelioma Personal Injury
Real Estate Sex Crimes Sexual Harassment Tax Traffic Wrongful Death
About Us : Disclaimer : Privacy Policy : Feedback Form : Contact Us
© Consumer Attorney USA Powered by: USA Attorney Network