Obrázky stránek
PDF
ePub
[blocks in formation]

delay is exacerbated by ill-advised decisions like this one. A prompt new sentencing hearing would have eliminated the basis for substantial attacks on respondent's sentence. That hearing has already been delayed by the attorney general's petition to this Court and, depending on the action the State Supreme Court may take after this second remand, may require further collateral proceedings in both the state and federal systems. The interest in avoiding unnecessary delay would surely be served by a prompt resentencing

Finally, I must once again express my concern about the Court's unseemly use of its discretionary docket to provide assistance to the prosecution-particularly in capital cases. In this case, a jury that heard all of the evidence recommended against a death sentence, and the trial judge's contrary decision was based in part on testimony about a crime of which Burr was later acquitted. When one considers the fact that the State has not yet come forward with a response to the points made in Justice Barkett's dissent, it is pellucidly clear that the Florida Supreme Court acted wisely in ordering a new sentencing hearing. Of course, the state court may after reconsideration adhere to its decision remanding for resentencing, just as it might have adhered, with additional explanation, to its original decision upholding the sentence after we vacated for reconsideration in light of Johnson. There is no good reason, however, for making the state court go through the exercise. I remain firmly convinced that “although this Court now has the power to review decisions defending federal constitutional rights, the claim of these cases on our docket is secondary to the need to scrutinize judgments disparaging those rights.” Delaware v. Van Arsdall, 475 U. S. 673, 697 (1986) (dissenting opinion). Surely the State's attenuated interest in enforcing a trial judge's decision to override a jury's recommendation against the imposition of the death sentence in a marginal case like this does not justify the summary action the Court has taken today.

I respectfully dissent. Miscellaneous Orders

No. D-807. IN RE DISBARMENT OF CALLY. It having been reported to the Court that James J. Cally has died, the rule to

position of the Death Penalty in Florida, 18 U. C. D. L. Rev. 1409, 1422–1424 (1985).

[blocks in formation]

show cause, heretofore issued on September 25, 1989 [492 U. S. 941), is hereby discharged.

No. D-858. IN RE DISBARMENT OF LOUDEN. Disbarment entered. [For earlier order herein, see 493 U. S. 1066.]

No. D-884. IN RE DISBARMENT OF SANNA. Disbarment entered. [For earlier order herein, see 494 U. S. 1053.] No. D-886. .

IN RE DISBARMENT OF MCCANN. Disbarment entered. [For earlier order herein, see 494 U. S. 1064.]

No. D-888. IN RE DISBARMENT OF RABEN. Disbarment entered. [For earlier order herein, see 494 U. S. 1064.]

No. D-906. IN RE DISBARMENT OF ERICKSON. It is ordered that Jonathan Erickson, of Corning, N. Y., be suspended from the practice of law in this Court and that a rule issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.

No. D-907. IN RE DISBARMENT OF RICHMAN. It is ordered that Irvin F. Richman, of Chicago, Ill., be suspended from the practice of law in this Court and that a rule issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.

No. D-908. IN RE DISBARMENT OF NEISTEIN. It is ordered that Bernard S. Neistein, of Chicago, Ill., be suspended from the practice of law in this Court and that a rule issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.

No. D-909. IN RE DISBARMENT OF MARTIN. It is ordered that Clyde P. Martin, Jr., of New Orleans, La., be suspended from the practice of law in this Court and that a rule issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.

No. D-910. IN RE DISBARMENT OF HENDRICKSON. It is ordered that Fredric Fedje Hendrickson, of Sioux Falls, S. D., be suspended from the practice of law in this Court and that a rule issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.

No. D-911. IN RE DISBARMENT OF BADALIAN. It is ordered that John M. Badalian, of Shaker Heights, Ohio, be suspended from the practice of law in this Court and that a rule issue, return

[blocks in formation]

able within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.

No. 89-907. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ET AL. v. CABRALES, 494 U. S. 1091. Motion of respondent for award of attorney's fees denied without prejudice to renewal of the motion in the United States District Court for the Central District of California.

No. 89-1027. NORFOLK & WESTERN RAILWAY CO. ET AL. V. AMERICAN TRAIN DISPATCHERS ASSN. ET AL.; and

No. 89-1028. CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC. v. BROTHERHOOD OF RAILWAY CARMEN ET AL. C. A. D. C. Cir. [Certiorari granted, 494 U. S. 1055.] Further consideration of motion of respondents American Train Dispatchers Association et al. to dismiss deferred for 120 days. Further briefing in this case suspended for 120 days.

No. 89–7268. IN RE GREEN; and

No. 89-7313. IN RE GREEN. Petitions for writs of mandamus denied. Probable Jurisdiction Noted

No. 88–1847. FORD MOTOR CREDIT Co., INC. v. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, STATE OF FLORIDA. Appeal from Dist. Ct. App. Fla., 1st Dist. Probable jurisdiction noted. Reported below: 537 So. 2d 1011. Certiorari Granted

No. 89-680. JAMES B. BEAM DISTILLING Co. v. GEORGIA ET AL. Sup. Ct. Ga. Certiorari granted. Reported below: 259 Ga. 363, 382 S. E. 2d 95.

No. 89-1217. LEHNERT ET AL. v. FERRIS FACULTY ASSN. ET AL. C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari granted. Reported below: 881 F. 2d 1388.

No. 89–1436. UNITED STATES v. R. ENTERPRISES, INC., ET AL. C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari granted.

Certiorari granted. Reported below: 884 F. 2d 772.

No. 89-1646. UNITED STATES ET AL. v. SMITH ET AL. C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari granted. Reported below: 885 F. 2d 650. Certiorari Denied

No. 89-1326. CROWDER, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS INDEPENDENT EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF CROWDER V. SINYARD ET

496 U. S.

June 11, 1990

Certiorari denied.

AL. C. A. 5th Cir.
F. 2d 804.

Reported below: 884

No. 89-1378. KLAVAN V. KLAVAN. Sup. Jud. Ct. Mass. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 405 Mass. 1105, 544 N. E. 2d 863.

No. 89-1405. TEMENGIL ET AL. v. TRUST TERRITORY OF THE PACIFIC ISLANDS ET AL. C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 881 F. 2d 647.

No. 89-1461. GILMORE STEEL CORP., DBA OREGON STEEL MILLS, INC. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD. C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.

No. 89-1462. HAAS V. UNITED STATES. C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 891 F. 2d 906.

No. 89-1471. BELL ET AL. v. UNITED STATES. C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 892 F. 2d 959.

No. 89–1476. SEATTLE-FIRST NATIONAL BANK V. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD ET AL. C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 892 F. 2d 792.

No. 89-1486. ACKROYD V. FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, AS RECEIVER FOR INDIAN SPRINGS STATE BANK. C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.

No. 89–1518. MATHER, TRUSTEE OF THE ESTATE IN BANKRUPTCY OF WATSON, ET AL. v. WEAVER ET AL. C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.

No. 89–1602. INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN & HELPERS OF AMERICA, AFLCIO v. UNITED STATES. C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.

No. 89-1606. MODEL MAGAZINE DISTRIBUTORS, INC. v. UNITED STATES ET AL. C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 884 F. 2d 772.

No. 89-1618. BUCKLEY BROADCASTING CORPORATION OF CALIFORNIA, DBA STATION KKHI V. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD. C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 891 F. 2d 230.

[blocks in formation]

No. 89-1619. RAFT, AKA RAFATDJAH v. CALIFORNIA. Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.

No. 89-1625. CITY OF BURLINGTON ET AL. v. KAPLAN ET AL. C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 891 F. 2d 1024.

No. 89-1628. SHEFFIELD v. JOHNSON SEED Co., INC. C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 892 F. 2d 76.

No. 89–1631. WRENN v. WALINSKI, JUDGE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO. C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.

No. 89–1637. SCHINDELAR V. ZAWADZKI ET AL. Super. Ct. N. J., App. Div. Certiorari denied.

No. 89-1644. TAYLOR v. NEW YORK. App. Div., Sup. Ct. N. Y., 4th Jud. Dept. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 155 App. Div. 2d 980, 549 N. Y. S. 2d 619.

No. 89-1645. MENDEL ET AL. v. SILVER. C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 894 F. 2d 598.

No. 89–1653. HEMMERLE v. BRAMALEA, INC., FKA BRAMALEA DEVELOPMENT U. S., LTD. Dist. Ct. App. Fla., 4th Dist. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 547 So. 2d 203.

No. 89-1665. KIRKLAND V. NORTHSIDE INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT. C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 890 F. 2d 794.

No. 89–1689. O’MALLEY ET AL. v. O'NEILL ET AL. C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 887 F. 2d 1557.

No. 89-1694. DURA-CORP. v. STS D'APPOLONIA, LTD. C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 898 F. 2d 142.

No. 89–1713. LINDELL v. UNITED STATES. C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 881 F. 2d 1313.

No. 89-1748. OREGON NATURAL RESOURCES COUNCIL v. MOHLA, SUPERVISOR, MT. HOOD NATIONAL FOREST, ET AL. C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 895 F. 2d

« PředchozíPokračovat »