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 WeeklyLingering doubt
By Karl R. Keys, Esq.
ADVERTISEMENTS
For the most part reading the California Supreme Court’s capital jurisprudence or almost any courts’ opinion on lingering doubt is much like have sex with a porcupine, not very satisfying. Today, however, the Cali Supreme Court in People v. Gay, the Court did the unthinkable, they reversed on lingering doubt.
But it is our firm belief that, notwithstanding this aggravating evidence, there is a reasonable possibility the jury would have selected the lesser but still serious penalty of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole had it been allowed to hear and consider the compelling defense of lingering doubt in full. As other courts have noted, ?residual doubt is perhaps the most effective strategy to employ at sentencing...continue to full postFull post as published by Capital Defense Weekly on March 20, 2008 (boomark / email).
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.

People v. Hovarter (Cal. Supreme Ct. - Aug. 11, 2008)
People v. Zamudio (Cal. Supreme Court - April 21, 2008)
The lingering effects of Rance
The Fear Of Disposing Of Paper







