You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #8: Siegelman's Attorneys File Motion For Former Governor's Release [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
L. Coyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 06:37 PM
Response to Original message
8. Siegelman's Attorneys File Motion For Former Governor's Release
Siegelman's Attorneys File Motion For Former Governor's Release ...
NBC13.com, AL - Feb 20, 2008 - http://www.nbc13.com/gulfcoastwest/vtm/news.apx.-content-articles-VTM-2008-02-20-0020.html

Attorneys for former Gov. Don Siegelman have filed a motion asking an appeals court to release their client during the appeal of his conviction in a government corruption case.

Siegelman's attorneys say a federal judge made several errors when he refused an appeal bond.

Attorneys claim there was substantial reason Siegelman would win on appeal. The filing also argues that charges were brought too late.

The move comes after the judge stated his reasons for refusing to allow Siegelman to remain free on bond during the appeal.

---------
Siegelman lawyers say judge made errors in denying release
By BOB JOHNSON al.com, AL - Feb 19, 2008 - http://www.al.com/newsflash/regional/index.ssf?/base/news-34/1203465259315620.xml&storylist=alabamanews


MONTGOMERY, Ala. (AP) — Attorneys for former Gov. Don Siegelman say a federal judge made numerous errors when he refused to release Siegelman from prison while he appeals his conviction in a government corruption case.

The attorneys filed a new motion Tuesday asking the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to order Siegelman released on an appeal bond.

They said there was substantial reason to believe he would prevail on appeal, partly because there was no "quid pro quo" in the actions that led to his bribery conviction. The filing also argued that the charges were brought too late. ...........
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC