Talk:Carl Andrew Weinman

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Carl Andrew Weinman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:37, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Role in the Sheppard case?[edit]

In "Notable cases" it says: "Among the notable cases heard by Weinman as a federal judge were the appeal of the murder conviction of Sam Sheppard".

But Weinman's judicial career began and ended as a district court judge. He was never an appellate judge, so ordinarily would not have heard Sheppard's appeal.

I can think of a couple possibilities here: one is that when the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals had a temporary vacancy, Weinman may have sat by designation (essentially serving as a temp on the appellate court) and heard the appeal. But even then it wouldn't have been Weinman alone who heard the case, it would have been Weinman as one judge on a panel of three judges, and this passage does not suggest that.

The other is that this was an action for habeus corpus and not an appeal. That would make sense and would also provide one path for a state homicide case case to get into the federal system. (The other, more common one is a writ of certiorari from the state's highest court to the US Supreme Court -- but that would not be consistent with Weinman, a federal district court judge, getting the case.) TJRC (talk) 00:37, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]