A Texas killer lost at the Supreme Court today. But I wonÂ’t comment on that. Instead, I want to comment on this argument that had been used by defense lawyers during the original trial.

Mosley's trial lawyers didn't deny the shooting but argued it was accidental, that as he was trying to surrender the weapon it went off five times.

If I were a defense lawyer, IÂ’d certainly hate to have that as the major plank of my defense. Especially if my client were facing charges of murdering a police officer.

Seems to me weÂ’ve got scum who ought to soon be eliminated from among the breathing.

Posted by: Greg at 09:42 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 113 words, total size 1 kb.

The first Latina justice of the Texas Supreme Court has been appointed by Governor Rick Perry.

Houston judge Eva Guzman will be named today by Gov. Rick Perry to replace Scott Brister on the Texas Supreme Court.

Though the court has had several women and several Hispanics judges, Guzman, the daughter of immigrants, is the first Hispanic woman to take that bench.

Guzman sits on the Houston-based Texas 14th Court of Appeals. Perry made her the first Hispanic woman on that court in 2001. She was elected to the bench in 2002 and 2004. Her opinions have been on a range of topics, and she writes often for the court on family law issues.

She is also a former Harris County Family Court judge, appointed in 1999 by then-Gov. George W. Bush and elected to the position subsequently.

Congratulations to Justice Guzman, who it has been my pleasure to campaign for a number of times over the years. She is a fine jurist, and I am proud to see her on one of our state's two highest courts (the other being the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals).

And I cannot help but be struck by the fact that, despite allegedly being pro-minority and pro-woman, the Democrats never could find a qualified Hispanic woman for the Texas Supreme Court.

Posted by: Greg at 12:46 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 228 words, total size 1 kb.

After all, even prisoners have certain religious liberties upon which the state cannot infringe.

A judge says the state of Pennsylvania cannot force a seriously ill prison inmate to undergo a blood transfusion - even if it could save his life.

In a ruling made public Wednesday, Commonwealth Court Judge Keith B. Quigley said inmate Anthony Lindsey's wishes must be respected under the First Amendment.

Lindsey suffers from a serious kidney ailment. A doctor at the Laurel Highlands state prison says the 37-year-old prisoner is in imminent danger of dying if he does not have a transfusion.

Lindsey says he refuses to allow a transfusion because it violates his religious beliefs as a Jehovah's Witness. He is serving a 13- to 36-year sentence for drug trafficking.

Now I recognize that the government can limit the exercise of religion in jails and prisons for security purposes, and I am generally supportive of their doing so to some degree. But attempting to limit a decision to forgo medical treatment made on religious grounds makes no sense, as it in no way burdens the state. That litigation was necessary here is just offensive.

Posted by: Greg at 11:56 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 202 words, total size 1 kb.

That would seem to be the implication of a decision coming out of Dallas.

A Texas judge has cleared the way for two Dallas men to get a divorce, ruling that Texas' ban on same-sex marriage violates the constitutional guarantee to equal protection under the law.

The Dallas Morning News reported that a Dallas district judge's Thursday ruling finds that the court “has jurisdiction to hear a suit for divorce filed by persons legally married in another jurisdiction.”

But here's the problem -- if it is a violation of equal protection of the law not to recognize gay marriages or to dissolve them for this reason, it logically follows that the refusal to perform those marriages is a violation of equal protection for precisely the same reason.

Interestingly enough, I've only encountered one media outlet that seems interested in taking up that angle on the case. Not even Texas' most prominent liberal blog has yet commented on the implications of this decision.

Posted by: Greg at 02:38 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 172 words, total size 2 kb.