"...No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privilege or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
The last time a case was decided in federal court on the state indictment process was Hurtado v. California (1884).
The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution allows the federal courts to become involved in state cases if one of the rights protected (meaning incorporated) by the 14th Amendment comes into play. The 14th Amendment offers significant protection for personal liberties in that it opens the federal courts to those who are unsatisfied with the decisions of state courts when an incorporated (applicable) federal constitutional provision is called into question.
In addition, the 14th Amendment allows persons to sue in federal court if they believe that a state law or regulation deprives them of the "equal protection of the laws."
Delay was given a Bill of No Return, and Mr. Prosecutor delayed having it signed by a judge for three days so he could brow beat another newly empanelled grand jury into issue an indictment.
There is no indictment in the delay case. Prosecutors failure to have the No Bill signed in 3 days is a violation of due process. Case Closed.And if the Texas court doesn't follow that reasoning , then a federal court will be teaching constitutional law to the State of Texas. Delay won't sit and wait for a trial on the merits.
Prosecutor can go to a dozen more Grand Juries, unless its a different charge than the one currently brought it still will be " no bill". There is No Bill in the case itself.
Delay has this ammo in tube one, and right now they are pulling back the trigger.
Go get 'em Tom, and then retire to that ranch and take it easy. You've earned it.
Let me see if I understand what you're saying.
Since the Grand Jury on Friday No Billed on these charges, a future grand jury cannot indict on the same charges? Is that correct?
Do you think Earle may have an out with his "new evidence over the weekend" ploy? Could he present "new evidence" on the same charges to a different grand jury and get a valid indictment?