Add to ORKGJudge Suster\u27s memorandum opinion detailing the his decision regarding testimony from the 1954 trial. He denied the Plaintiff\u27s motion in limine to exclude the 1954 trial testimony of unavailable witnesses. The exclusionary rule does not apply to judicial errors and does not apply in civil cases
This is the State of Ohio’s request that the court exclude exhibits and testimony that relates to th...
The State of Ohio seeks to exclude Plaintiff\u27s Exhibits 26, 27, and 110 from trial, which are aud...
The State of Ohio seeks to exclude Plaintiff\u27s Exhibits 26, 27, and 110 from trial, which are aud...
The State of Ohio argues that the 1954 trial testimony should not be excluded from this trial. It cl...
The Estate of Sam Sheppard argues that since the 1954 trial was deemed unconstitutional, the testimo...
Judge Suster\u27s memorandum opinion detailing the his decision regarding testimony from the 1954 tr...
In this memorandum opinion the court ruled on motion by both the Sheppard Estate and the State of Oh...
Judge Suster\u27s memorandum opinion detailing the rationale for the court\u27s decisions on: plai...
In many of the depositions, the witnesses were asked to express an opinion as to the guilt or innoce...
The State of Ohio asserted that it had submitted Dr. Marsters\u27 1966 trial testimony as Marsters e...
Plaintiff argued that testimony from the 1954 coroner\u27s inquest should not be admitted in the 200...
The State of Ohio asserted that testimony from the 1954 coroner\u27s inquest should not be excluded ...
The State of Ohio moves to exclude evidence that it views as clearly irrelevant or inadmissible hear...
Judge Suster\u27s memorandum opinion detailing the rationale for the court\u27s decisions on: plai...
The State of Ohio’s motion to prevent the jury from hearing the testimony of expert witnesses Chapma...
This is the State of Ohio’s request that the court exclude exhibits and testimony that relates to th...
The State of Ohio seeks to exclude Plaintiff\u27s Exhibits 26, 27, and 110 from trial, which are aud...
The State of Ohio seeks to exclude Plaintiff\u27s Exhibits 26, 27, and 110 from trial, which are aud...
The State of Ohio argues that the 1954 trial testimony should not be excluded from this trial. It cl...
The Estate of Sam Sheppard argues that since the 1954 trial was deemed unconstitutional, the testimo...
Judge Suster\u27s memorandum opinion detailing the his decision regarding testimony from the 1954 tr...
In this memorandum opinion the court ruled on motion by both the Sheppard Estate and the State of Oh...
Judge Suster\u27s memorandum opinion detailing the rationale for the court\u27s decisions on: plai...
In many of the depositions, the witnesses were asked to express an opinion as to the guilt or innoce...
The State of Ohio asserted that it had submitted Dr. Marsters\u27 1966 trial testimony as Marsters e...
Plaintiff argued that testimony from the 1954 coroner\u27s inquest should not be admitted in the 200...
The State of Ohio asserted that testimony from the 1954 coroner\u27s inquest should not be excluded ...
The State of Ohio moves to exclude evidence that it views as clearly irrelevant or inadmissible hear...
Judge Suster\u27s memorandum opinion detailing the rationale for the court\u27s decisions on: plai...
The State of Ohio’s motion to prevent the jury from hearing the testimony of expert witnesses Chapma...
This is the State of Ohio’s request that the court exclude exhibits and testimony that relates to th...
The State of Ohio seeks to exclude Plaintiff\u27s Exhibits 26, 27, and 110 from trial, which are aud...
The State of Ohio seeks to exclude Plaintiff\u27s Exhibits 26, 27, and 110 from trial, which are aud...