Libby Judge Files Expanded Opinion

[WillyT]

Libby Judge Files Expanded Opinion
Details Decision Not Allowing Libby to Remain Free

By JOSH GERSTEIN
Staff Reporter of the Sun
June 22, 2007 posted 4:38 am EDT

<snip>

A federal judge is adding the heft of a 30-page legal opinion to his decision last week not to permit a former chief of staff to Vice President Cheney, I. Lewis Libby Jr., to remain free while he appeals his convictions for obstructing the CIA leak investigation.

Judge Reggie Walton's decision to file a detailed and carefully-reasoned justification for his ruling adds some incline to the uphill battle Libby faces in trying to convince a federal appeals court panel to grant him a stay of his 30-month prison term while his lawyers fight to overturn his conviction. The lengthy opinion could also be viewed as a shot across the bow of the appeals court panel, which is certain to face claims it had more of an eye on politics than law if it chooses to upend Judge Walton's decision.

In a footnote to the opinion he filed Thursday, Judge Walton said he wanted "to ensure that the Circuit Court has a clear record of this Court's conclusion and reasoning" in denying the motion to stay Libby's sentence.

And...

Judge Walton's latest opinion could also be seen as a further retort to 12 legal scholars, some of the eminent in the profession, who filed an amicus brief arguing that Mr. Fitzgerald's appointment raised serious constitutional questions. If that was Judge Walton's intent, it may have been overkill since the appeals court on Wednesday refused an amicus brief from the same scholars.

Based on the schedule the appeals court set for briefs, it seems that the panel could make a decision as soon as next week on Libby's request for a stay.

If the court turns him down, he could seek relief from the Supreme Court. Another possibility, first raised on National Review's Web site, is that Mr. Bush could issue a form of clemency known as a respite, which could have the same effect as a stay.

<snip>

Link: http://www.nysun.com/article/57156

Ok... somebody at DU was telling me that SCOTUS was not an option here. What gives?

:shrug:

[wakeme2008]

1. Info on Respite

http://sentencing.typepad.com/sentencing_law_and_policy/2007/06/should_presiden.html

Last week, as discussed here, former federal prosecutor William Otis advocates clemency for Lewis Libby as an alternative to a full pardon. Today, in this great National Review piece P. S. Ruckman Jr. throws out the idea of a respite. Here is part of an adroit little commentary:

The Constitution gives presidents the power to grant "reprieves and pardons." The U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted that language to include pardons, conditional pardons, commutations of sentence, conditional commutations of sentence, remissions of fines, as well as forfeitures, reprieves, respites, and amnesties. A respite delays the execution of a sentence. It does not address issues of due process or guilt or innocence. It merely suspends sentence for a designated period of time.

George Washington granted the first respites in June, 1795, when he delayed the execution of two men who fought in the Whiskey Rebellion — both of whom were eventually pardoned. The typical respite lasts between 30 and 90 days. But many times, initial grants have been followed by a second and third respite, or as many additional respites as were necessary. Woodrow Wilson delayed the six-and-a-half-year prison sentences of two men with nine respites because an "investigation of the facts" had taken "considerable time" — 13 months to be exact. Wilson also delayed the five-year sentences of W.G. and S.G. Simpson with three respites before pardoning them.... There is, in short, a long history to the use of the respite.

[WillyT]

2. Interesting, Thanks !!!

Never heard of a repite before the Libby trial.

:hi: