The Unspoken Question About The Skakel Habeas Case
Posted: December 7, 2013 Filed under: General Law | Tags: habeas, skakel Leave a commentAs any conscious person knows, Michael Skakel was recently released from prison on bail. His release follows Superior Court judge Tom Bishop’s decision that Skakel’s defense lawyer did not provide a constitutionally adequate defense during Skakel’s trial for the murder of Martha Moxley. Read the rest of this entry »
Executive Order No. 38–A Step In The Right Direction
Posted: December 3, 2013 Filed under: General Law | Tags: foia, freedom of information, malloy Leave a commentI have not always been thrilled by some of current administration’s actions with respect to freedom of information, but if someone is going to criticize an administration, he or she also should give credit where credit is due. Read the rest of this entry »
Final Judgments And Attorney’s Fees
Posted: December 1, 2013 Filed under: Appellate Law, Practice and Procedure | Tags: attorney's fees, final judgment; final judgment rule 1 CommentIs a trial court judgment final, for the purpose of seeking appellate review, if all issues in a case have been resolved except the issue of attorney’s fees? The United States Supreme Court is going to revisit that issue this term in Ray Haluch Gravel Co. v. Central Pension Fund. I say “revisit” because many of us thought that the Supreme Court had settled that issue long ago. Read the rest of this entry »
Initial Thoughts On The Sandy Hook Summary Report
Posted: November 25, 2013 Filed under: General Law | Tags: freedom of information, freedom of information act, Sandy Hook 1 CommentAs promised, this afternoon Danbury State’s Attorney Stephen Sedensky released his report of the shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School and the Lanza home on December 14, 2012. The 44-page report is available here. The 236-page appendix is available here. Having read the report, I have a few reactions. With one exception, my comments are limited to the legal implications of certain statements in the report. Read the rest of this entry »
Discussing The Sandy Hook Report With Colin McEnroe
Posted: November 25, 2013 Filed under: General Law | Tags: colin mcenroe, freedom of information, Sandy Hook Leave a commentColin McEnroe kindly invited me to speak with him this morning on his show on WNPR about the Danbury State’s Attorney’s highly anticipated summary report of the Sandy Hook investigation. Click here to listen to a podcast of our conversation, which begins at approximately 21:10 minutes into the program.
Discussing The Long-Delayed Sandy Hook Report On WNPR’s “Where We Live”
Posted: November 20, 2013 Filed under: General Law | Tags: Sandy Hook, sedensky Leave a commentI had the honor and pleasure of appearing this morning as a guest on WNPR’s “Where We Live,” with host John Dankosky and regular guests Colin McEnroe, Mark Pazniokas and Matt Sturdevant. The topic: The long-delayed release by Danbury State’s Attorney Stephen Sedensky of the Sandy Hook investigation report.
Click here for the podcast of this morning’s discussion, which starts at 24:21 minutes into the program. Or watch the program on CT-N, starting at 23:41.
To Whom Is State’s Attorney Stephen Sedensky Accountable?
Posted: November 16, 2013 Filed under: General Law | Tags: Sandy Hook, sedensky Leave a commentIn recent days Governor Malloy has expressed his extreme impatience and displeasure with the length of time it is taking Danbury State’s Attorney Stephen J. Sedensky III to release his own final report of the tragic events of December 14, 2012 at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, CT. (I say “his own final report” because the State Police are preparing their own investigative report, as is customary. It needs to be released as well. A highly redacted “executive summary” by Mr. Sedensky is not sufficient.)
Governor Malloy has stated of the prosecutors in the Danbury State’s Attorney’s office, “They don’t work for me. If they did, this report would have been out already.”
Governor Malloy is not passing the buck. He is absolutely accurate in stating that he does not control Connecticut’s State’s Attorneys. But if the governor is not in charge of them, who is? Read the rest of this entry »
The Paul Vallas Case Ctd.
Posted: November 14, 2013 Filed under: Appellate Law | Tags: paul vallas, quo warranto Leave a commentThe Supreme Court just released its decision in Lopez, et al. v. Bridgeport Board of Education, et al.,, otherwise known as the Paul Vallas case, about which I have previously posted. The Supreme Court held that absent fraud, a quo warranto action can not be used to mount a collateral attack on an administrative agency’s determination that a public officer is qualified to hold his position. Accordingly, the Court reversed the judgment of the trial court (which had ruled that Mr. Vallas could not hold the office of superintendent) and remanded the case with instructions to dismiss the plaintiffs’ complaint.
The Empirical Basis For Transparent Government
Posted: November 5, 2013 Filed under: General Law | Tags: open government, sunlight, transparency Leave a comment“Trust but verify,” Ronald Reagan liked to say. He used the phrase in connection with nuclear disarmament negotiations with the former Soviet Union. I think the sentiment also describes the attitude we should hold towards our own governments–federal, state and local.
The Skakel Opinion Ctd.–What Will The Supreme Court Do?
Posted: October 30, 2013 Filed under: Appellate Law, Practice and Procedure | Tags: bishop, habeas, michael skakel Leave a commentWith the State of Connecticut having indicated its intent to appeal the trial court decision that Michael Skakel’s attorney, Michael (“Mickey”) Sherman, failed to provide a constitutionally adequate defense for his client, many are now speculating about what the Appellate Court or, more likely, the state Supreme Court will do with the appeal. Will the Court affirm Judge Bishop’s decision, or will it reverse?
Appealingly Brief! 