Should Reade have recused herself?decided not to preside over Rubashkin?s trial and sentencing?given her involvement in planning the raid? A federal appeals court rejected that argument last year, mostly on procedural grounds. Rubashkin?s lawyers let a deadline pass for asking for a recusal and only raised the issue after the trial, which poses a problem for him on appeal. Still, in asking the Supreme Court to take the case, Rubashkin?s lawyers?who now include former Solicitor General Paul Clement?are asking the justices to take a stand on Reade?s participation in the immigration raid planning. The argument is that Reade and the prosecutors had an obligation to tell Rubashkin?s lawyers about all that pre-raid planning. Except in very limited circumstances, judges aren?t allowed to meet with one side in a case without the other, and so those weekly meetings broke the rules. Several friend-of-the-court briefs have been written in support of Rubashkin?s position, or are on the way, and the signers include former judges and U.S. attorneys. One of the briefs was co-authored by my sister Lara, who is a clinical teaching fellow at the University of California Hastings law school, and lawyer Allison Ehlert.
amanda bynes fibonacci sequence maryland lottery grand jury ozzie guillen fidel castro darvish george zimmerman website
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.