Saturday, October 19, 2013
In Cheever v Kansas, Cheever was convicted and sentenced to die for kiling a sheriff. The Kansas Supreme Court overturned that conviction, arguing that the 5th Amendment prohibited the use of a psychiatric evaluation and had not been waived by Cheever's claim he was voluntarily intoxicated.
The Supreme Court appears about to undo that reversal.
I have not read all the opinions or briefs, but I'm wondering why the Kansas decision wasn't based in part on the Kansas Constitution, which would have kept the case out of the Supreme Court.
If his lawyers didnt raise those issues, would that be ineffective counsel?
The Supreme Court appears about to undo that reversal.
I have not read all the opinions or briefs, but I'm wondering why the Kansas decision wasn't based in part on the Kansas Constitution, which would have kept the case out of the Supreme Court.
If his lawyers didnt raise those issues, would that be ineffective counsel?
Comments:
Post a Comment
