The Supreme Court turned down Julie Mabus’s second appeal of her case, rejecting her challenge of both Judge DeLaughter’s dismissal of the one claim that remained after her first appeal (a fraud claim), and rejecting on law of the case claims rejecting her effort to reopen the other claims. There are concurrences by Kitchens and Dickinson hoping that what happens to Julie Mabus never happens again. More on all this later.
– NMC comment on 4/19/9
There are three unanimous opinions, one about efforts to draft a release to preserve claims against other parties, another (in which I get more than a whiff of trial court home-cooking) where a trial court was reversed for denying a motion because it was erroneously captioned, and a strange case in which a prisoner filed papers (pro se) asserting prison conditions were inhumane. Taking his papers as a petition for post-conviction relief, the circuit court ruled they should have been filed in the county where he was convicted. The Supreme Court viewed the papers as more akin to a civil rights challenge to prison conditions and reversed, racking up a rare win for a prisoner in anything remotely like a post conviction proceeding.