Meanwhile, we have to deal with the gruel they dish out.So, keep an eye on any changes to the statute of limitations for various sex related offenses. AND, keep an eye on any potential increases to punishments.In Stogner v. California, 539 U.S. 607 (2003), the United States Supreme Court held that California’s retroactive extension of the statute of limitations for sexual offenses committed against minors was an unconstitutional ex post facto law. This is interesting because this would seem to apply to the California statute, if the offense has a short statute of limitations.
The court refused to find that the attorneys' decision to merely dispute whether the defendant actually committed the murder was a "strategic choice" when prevailing professional standards -- such as the American Bar Association's Criminal Justice Standards -- supported a decision to further investigate Wiggins' childhood. Thus, counsel were ineffective under the Sixth and 14th amendments.Other important defense victories came in Sell v. U.S., 123 S.Ct. 2174 (2003), where the court placed restrictions on the government's ability to force a defendant to be medicated in order that he could be competent to stand trial, and Stogner v. California, 123 S.Ct. 2446 (2003), where the court held that it was a violation of the ex post facto clause for the California legislature to allow the prosecution of cases in which the statute of limitations had already expired.What about the new term? If I had to pick one case that I believe will have major significance, I would choose Yarborough v. Alvarado, No. 02-1684 (cert.