ADVERTISEMENT
Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Criminal Law Blogs -> Capital Defense Weekly
OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Criminal Law
: Capital Defense WeeklySixth Circuit “win”
By Karl R. Keys, Esq.
ADVERTISEMENTS
A Thursday “win” is noted:
Today, D?Ambrosio v. Bagley, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit split over an interesting question in a capital habeas case: Where a habeas petitioner makes a Brady claim that the government suppressed or withheld mitigating evidence, when does the government ?expressly waive? its defense that the petitioner failed to exhaust the Brady claim in state court? In this case, a divided panel held that the government?s conspicuous failure to raise such a claim could constitute an ?express? waiver, even though the waiver was never made explicit. On this basis, the court upheld the district court?s grant of death-row inmate Joe D?Ambrosio?s habeas petition. Judge Rogers wrote the opinion of the court, joined by Judge Gibbons...continue to full postFull post as published by Capital Defense Weekly on June 05, 2008 (boomark / email).
Lawsuits and Settlements
Specialty Lamp International
Recalls Counterfeit Circuit Breakers
Related Searches
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.

You Can't Say Seven Words on the Internet
No rest for the sentencing weary in the Sixth Circuit
The friendly themes to be stressed in Sixth Circuit acquitted conduct case
Today's Sixth Circuit must-read on reasonableness
Crackdown on biblical speech challenged








