"With respect to the second goal," the court in Save-A-Life stated that "strict construction of the removal statute [does] not compel adoption of the first-served
defendant rule, [especially] in light of the Supreme Court's 1999 decision in Murphy Brothers." (45) "In the absence of controlling authority from the Supreme Court or the Seventh Circuit, and consistent with the persuasive reasoning of the Sixth, Eighth, and Eleventh Circuits," the court in Save-A-Life concluded that "each
defendant in a case is entitled to remove an action from state to federal court, regardless of whether earlier-served
defendants declined to do so, so long as all
defendants consent to removal." (46)
The assumption that in the absence of plea the
defendant would face trial is only true if prosecutors have credible threats to take to trial those
defendants that choose not to plea.
Arguably one of the most difficult of these decisions is whether to pursue an insanity defense on behalf of a
defendant. However, there are many misconceptions associated with the insanity defense, some of which defense counsel may also hold.
Osanyintuyi said that the
defendants conspired among themselves to commit felony to wit: stealing.
This came during a court session to view the appeal of
defendants, but it was rejected.
On July 3, 2018,
defendants removed the case to this court pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
Ahmed Al Hammadi, said the Fourth High Criminal Court today issued several rulings against 17
defendants charged with the use of weapon, inciting to use them, possession of explosive devices, firearms and ammunition without a permit for a terrorist purpose, concealing convicts, illegally entering and exiting the Kingdom of Bahrain.
Where
defendant, an alleged co-conspirator, could not show any risk that a joint trial would compromise a specific trial right of one of the
defendants, or show that a joint trial would prevent the jury from making a reliable judgment about guilt or innocence, her motion to sever her trial was denied.
30 two
defendants to 5 and 10 years in prison, in their retrial in the case known in media as the "Zeitoun cell".
The Abu Dhabi Appeal Court heard that three of the Asian
defendants had forged salary certificates to show they were working for a government department and obtained personal loans from the bank.
Prosecutors on Wednesday, 15 August nolle prosequi (abandoned trial against)
defendants Bill Caesar Kennedy, Massa Kenedy and Juana Bracewell to have them testify for government against
defendant Williams in return.
'The Plaintiff will at the trial contend that the 4th
Defendant, as Vice Chancellor of the 2nd
Defendant and an Economist of known repute, failed to secure the best interest of the 2nd
Defendant when he failed to ensure strict compliance by the 2nd and 3rd
Defendants, with the 2nd
Defendant's FRG, the Ghana Government PPP policy and Act 663 among others, to ensure and guarantee value for money for the 2nd
Defendant, a conduct tantamount to 'waste and misuse of public funds,' he said in his statement filed on his behalf by Paintsil, Pantsil and Co, an Accra based legal firm.
