Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Criminal Law Blogs -> Grits for Breakfast
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
: Grits for BreakfastConfession Suppression: Why we need the exclusionary rule
ADVERTISEMENTS
Defense attorney Katherine Scardino, blogging over at Women In Crime Ink, says a Texas death row inmate "hit the jackpot" when a federal judge granted a new trial because of police misconduct. Writes Scardino, the defendant:is currently in the process of being removed from Death Row and returned to the Harris County Jail. His name is Robert Fratta. Our own Kelly Seigler was the prosecutor.In 1994, Robert Fratta was accused of hiring two men to kill his wife. The couple was going through a very contentious divorce/custody fight during that time, and Fratta apparently made several statements to friends about him wanting her dead.Fratta?s two co-defendants were Howard Guidry and Joseph Prystash. All three men received death sentences.In all capital cases where the jury has sentenced an individual to death, there is an automatic direct appeal...continue to full postFull post as published by Grits for Breakfast on October 16, 2008 (boomark / email).
Related Law Articles
Copyright Lawsuits: Critical Issues Before Filing Copyright
Federa Rule 11(b) Considerations
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.

Media Ignorance of Exclusionary Rule
Is the Exclusionary Rule Consistent With Originalism:
CA11: Riverside/Gerstein violation did not warrant suppression of statement
Why Does the United States Have an Exclusionary Rule:
SCOTUS Will Hear Evidence Suppression
Originalism Does Not Support an Exclusionary Rule








