Writy.
  • Home
  • Mass Tort
  • Personal Injury
  • Civil Rights
  • Worker’s Compensation
  • Premises Liability
  • Police Misconduct
No Result
View All Result
Writy.
  • Home
  • Mass Tort
  • Personal Injury
  • Civil Rights
  • Worker’s Compensation
  • Premises Liability
  • Police Misconduct
No Result
View All Result
Writy.
No Result
View All Result
Justices decline to block execution of Arizona man with schizophrenia

Court allows Arizona to execute man who claimed that state withheld evidence

Injury Insiders by Injury Insiders
November 16, 2022
in Premises Liability
0

You might also like

Announcement of orders and opinions for Monday, May 16

Announcement of opinions for Wednesday, April 17

April 17, 2024
501940

Bet Gordon Ramsey Feels Like An Idiot Sandwich For Letting This Happen To His Pub

April 16, 2024

[ad_1]

CAPITAL CASE


By Amy Howe

on Nov 16, 2022
at 12:01 pm

The Supreme Court refused to block the lethal injection of Murray Hooper, a 76-year-old inmate who was scheduled to be executed in Arizona on Wednesday. Hooper had asked the justices to intervene in light of what he characterized as new evidence showing that he was wrongfully convicted, but Arizona prosecutors dismissed his contention as “entirely trumped-up.”

In a pair of brief, unsigned orders, the justices rejected Hooper’s final appeals. There were no recorded dissents.

Hooper was sentenced to death for his role in the murder-for-hire of Pat Redmond and Helen Phelps during a home invasion on New Year’s Eve in 1980. He argued that prosecutors had only revealed to him in the past few weeks – more than 40 years after the crime – that the lone eyewitness had failed to identify him in a photo line-up. The prosecutors’ failure to divulge this evidence sooner, he said, violates his rights under the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in Brady v. Maryland, holding that prosecutors must disclose any evidence they have that is favorable to the defendant.

The state dismissed Hooper’s contention as “totally baseless.” A letter from prosecutors to the Arizona Board of Clemency indicating that Marilyn Redmond, Pat’s wife and the only eyewitness, had been unable to identify Hooper in a line-up was, the state explained, an “error”; Marilyn Redmond “had never been shown a printed line-up.” The Arizona state court that considered Hooper’s efforts to invalidate his conviction based on this allegation, the state pointed out, concluded that the allegation “has no evidentiary support and no basis in fact.”

This article was originally published at Howe on the Court.

[ad_2]

Injury Insiders

Injury Insiders

Next Post
Right to Work Checks for UK Employers from 1 October 2022 – be prepared for changes but beware misleading information

UK Business Immigration – changes to Guidance on UK start dates for sponsored workers

© 2022 injuryinsiders.com - All rights reserved by Injury Insiders.

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Mass Tort
  • Personal Injury
  • Civil Rights
  • Worker’s Compensation
  • Premises Liability
  • Police Misconduct

© 2022 injuryinsiders.com - All rights reserved by Injury Insiders.