The Deseret News reported this afternoon that Judge Conn has decided to wait until after the Texas Court rules on the admissibility of items seized in the April YfZ raid before his ruling.
Deseret News article
The hearing challenging the warrants is scheduled in May in Judge Walther's Court.
I keep thinking there is some conflict in having the issuing judge be the judge to decide on the admissibility of the warrants. Seems like just a tad bit of a conflict, to me. I'm not familiar with the Texas system, but here in Pa., I'd petition the President Judge to assign the hearing to another judge who was not involved in the issuing stage of the warrant(s).
I'm also wondering what happens iof this Texas judge admits the evidence and there is a conviction, that is not upheld on appeal, what happens to anything that has gone forward in Arizona?
I'm also wondering if this is going to open a nasty can of worms in the Arizona Court? Will the state's attorneys now use "evidence" they otherwise would not have?
What does this decision to delay do to Jeffs' right to a speedy trial? Is this an undue delay?
Can a state trial court judge decide to defer to a ruling from the equivalent judiciary level ruling in another state?
9 years ago
