Podcasts about panetti

In Episode 12, Notable Supreme Court Cases, Part 3 Kyle and Lisa talked about cases decided between 1995 and 2010, including Schlup, Atkins, Roper, Crawford, House and Panetti. They looked at the background of each case, the issues raised by the Petitioners and the decisions of the Supreme Court. We are open to suggestions for any cases we missed and we will do this again next season.

Guests: Preston, Parker, and Campbell Panetti   What are the primary aspects of manhood that you've learned growing up in the Panetti household? You take the Panetti name wherever you go. People know you by your actions. Actions either validate what you say you believe, or undermine it. Be responsible in the little things. Responsibility is a learned behavior.  Be available to do whatever needs to be done. Humility is essential to be a man who looks to serve others and not be served. If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all! Use your words to build others up, not tear them down. “The tongue has the power of life and death, and those who love it will eat its fruit.” Proverbs 18:21 If you are filled with the Word of God, you have the opportunity to share God's Word with others. Your relationship with God is the most important relationship you have! Church is not optional. You WILL do the things you love and prioritize. Don't be a fan of Jesus…if you're a Christian, you're on the team! Take responsibility for your actions, don't be an excuse maker. Humility is an essential character quality to foster. As the Scriptures say, “God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble.” James 4:6 Learn from others who are doing life well. Young guys should be looking for older mentors, older guys should be looking to mentor younger guys! “To whom much is given, much is required.” Luke 12:48 Those who have been forgiven much can forgive others. The power of other men speaking into your life is crucial. Find men who are doing life well, who know God personally and intimately, and have them share wisdom for your journey! Thank you for listening to Training4Manhood - thrilled that we've been able to share 100 episodes with you and we hope that you've found the journey helpful and interesting so far! On to the next 100!   T4M guys - just a reminder that Training4Manhood is a non-profit, 501(c)(3) ministry and you can make donations either via Zelle (info@training4manhood.com) or by visiting the Training4Manhood website. Huge thank you to Jared Wood for allowing T4M to use his music in our intro and outro selections.

Alexis Ramirez and Coble Panetti are on the show today. Both former guests, Alexis and Coble are very funny comics, and sometimes we carpool together to mics. So today we brought the mics with us on our drive to the Asheville Music Hall (Open mic every Wednesday 8PM). On the ride, you'll hear Alexis yell at me for questionable driving. We also debate the worst way to die, who is the smartest local comic, and why I'm uncomfortable talking about sex. Follow Alexis and Coble at the links below, and have a great week. #standup #podcast Follow Our Guests: https://www.instagram.com/coble_panetti/ https://twitter.com/cobbpanetti https://www.facebook.com/coble.panetti https://www.youtube.com/@asapangry https://www.instagram.com/asapangry_/ https://www.facebook.com/abandondedbrain https://www.tiktok.com/@asapangry?_t=8V286o2fZtu&_r= Follow My Other Stuff: David on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/davidbakker7/?hl=en The Podcast on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ididthisinsteadofkillingmyself/?hl=en The Podcast on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/2GGXI851tdRDK1XmiSgcMk David's Twitter… https://twitter.com/davidbakker7 And TikTok…I guess (you don't have to…really. We should all delete this app). https://www.tiktok.com/@davidbakker7 Don't Click This… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ

Esattamente la chiaccherata sul s***o che faresti in spogliatoio con un amico, però un po' divulgativa

Patti Panetti, Fewell Park Center Supervisor and Chair of the Rock Hill Christmas Parade Committee, joins CityCast to discuss this week's parade, what to look for, where to park and more.

In this episode, Mike discusses the extraordinary cultural challenges that Christian kids face today with his longtime friend and former colleague, Dan Panetti. Dan, who is an attorney and Worldview Director at one of the leading Christian schools in America, Prestonwood Christian Academy, presents some important keys to preparing the hearts and minds of today's youth. They also discuss the upcoming Biblical Worldview Institute 2022, that will be held in Plano, Texas, on November 1-2, and is open to all students, parents and educators.   SHOW NOTES: prestonwoodchristian.org MikeandKellyJohnson.com Copyright 2022- Mike and Kelly Johnson 

Coble Panetti is a new friend of mine in the local comedy scene. Got to know him on this episode, and he's a fascinating guy. Recently moved to Columbia, Coble Started comedy five years ago at the Coffee Underground in Greenville. In addition to standup, Coble is a prolific painter, poker player, golfer, and all around smart dude. We talked about his golf career, and how mental skills in golf relate to standup. We also discussed psychology, neuroplasticity, meditation, dreams, and a lot more. I really enjoyed this interview. Follow Coble at the links below, and hope you have a great week! #standup #podcast Follow Our Guest(s): https://www.instagram.com/coble_panetti/ https://twitter.com/cobbpanetti https://www.facebook.com/coble.panetti Follow My Other Stuff: David on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/davidbakker7/?hl=en The Podcast on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ididthisinsteadofkillingmyself/?hl=en The Podcast on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/2GGXI851tdRDK1XmiSgcMk David's Twitter… https://twitter.com/davidbakker7 And TikTok…I guess (you don't have to…really. We should all delete this app). https://www.tiktok.com/@davidbakker7 And your mom… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ

Ospite della puntata: ⁣

On this episode of Special Criminals, we will be discussing the case of Scott Louis Panetti, a man convicted of murdering his in-laws while suffering from paranoid schizophrenia. Stay tuned to hear more!Please rate and review! Every review counts and helps us out. Follow us on social media @specialcriminals on Facebook and Instagram. Twitter @SpecialCrimePod. You can also send us an email at specialcriminals@gmail.com. Or visit our website at www.specialcriminals.com. We appreciate all of our listeners! Share us with a friend!

This week on the pod, Bec and Geraldo chatted with the lovely Grace Panetti (she/her), a graduate student in the Walsh and Schelter groups in the Department of Chemistry at the University of Pennsylvania. We discussed their experience working in two labs, the intersections of queerness, coming out as trans, and so much more! We hope y'all are staying safe out there. We'll see y'all next week! Follow Grace on Twitter @GracePanetti and us @MFQCPod.

Jessa and Nick are social distancing and recording, which has led to arguably the worst audio they've ever produced.  (Which all of you know is really saying something.)  We rushed to post this because we missed last week and did not send it to our editor.  If it's intolerable, let us know and we'll pull it and have it edited and put it back up.  We think it's a fun conversation about appeals, competency, and how courts define words, though.  

Jessa and Nick had technical difficulties due to the ongoing social distancing orders, so she is joined by Paisley, their associate attorney, to discuss the legal standards applied to determining if a defendant can represent themselves and what role standby counsel plays in trials with pro se defendants.

Oggi un episodio special di 45 minuti su in classico dell'animazione italiana. In questa (mega) puntata: - buchi di trama - uomini-uccello e altri animali fantastici - riadattamenti fatti male - Wikipedia si droga Conducono: Selvaggia & Raffaele In regia: Alessandro Visentini e Gianmarco Zonta Una produzione RuzzanteLab

Nick and Jessa are back to finally tackle the "People's Choice" case voted for on Facebook...like three months later. Oops. They're going all the way back to the early 90's in Texas. Part 1 introduces the case of Scott Panetti, a man with a lengthy and well-documented history of mental illness, who was charged with capital offenses. They also break down the differences between NGI and competency. Thanks to Smithsonian Channel Plus, a new sponsor!

This is Part 2 of the interview with Captain Thomas Govan on his experience in arguing before the U.S. Supreme Court in October 2018 in the case of Vernon Madison v. State of Alabama. If you didn’t hear Part 1, please do, where we discuss an overview of the case, how Captain Govan became involved and selected to present oral argument, and the preparation he took leading up to the day of oral argument. Summary In summary for the case of Madison v. State of Alabama: The US Supreme Court held in a 5-3 decision with the State of Alabama that the 8th Amendment permits a state to execute a prisoner who no longer remembers the crime. However, the Court held that a state cannot executive rationally understand the reason for execution, whether that reason is due to psychosis or dementia, as is the case with Mr. Madison. Justice Kagan authored the Court’s majority opinion and was joined by Chief Justice Roberts, and Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan. The dissent included Justice Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch. Justice Cavanagh had not yet taken the bench. The majority opinion followed the precedents set in the seminal cases of Ford v. Wainwright, 1986, and Panetti v. Quarterman, 2007, where the Court held the 8th Amendment prohibits executing a prisoner who lost his/her “sanity” in that “killing one who has no capacity” to understand the crime or punishment “simply offends humanity.” And that there is no “retributive value” in executing a person who has no comprehension of the sentence.

This week's episode covers Madison v. Alabama, and whether or not the 8th Amendment bars the execution of someone who lacks mental capacity, but first Brett and Nazim read the single greatest listener feedback we've ever received.  There's no time stamp this week, because the intro is worth your time, and we'll probably be making jokes about it until the end of time.

⬇️***UPDATE/AUDIO APOLOGY**⬇️ Audio got cut off at the end of our sentences so we are super sorry for how the episode sounds. But hey, what’s new. Well, we've made it this far. It's the final episode of season one!! Cassie will go into the super sad and tragic case of Scott Panetti, a very sick man suffering from Schizophrenia. We discuss how the judicial system handled his case and his illness. *SPOILER ALERT* he is still on death row for his crime. Hannah then tells y'all about Dissociative Identity Disorder and Gabrial Hall, a native of the Philippines, who killed a man in his and left his poor wife barely clinging to life, over in College Station. Just wait to hear how much we laugh at this guy. We will be back in a few weeks! Hannah will give y'all some Survivor Stories in the mean time! Happy Halloween! DONATE HERE: https://www.paypal.me/texastenthirtyonepod WEBSITE: www.texastenthirtyonepodcast.com FACEBOOK: texastenthirtyonepodcast INSTAGRAM: texastenthirtyonepodcast TWITTER: txtenthirtyone  

On November 6, 2017, the Supreme Court issued per curiam decisions in Kernan v. Cuero and Dunn v. Madison, both cases involving habeas petitions filed by state prisoners. In this episode, we will be discussing both decisions.Up first is Kernan v. Cuero. Michael Cuero pled guilty to two felony charges, on the understanding that the maximum prison time he faced was 14 years and 4 months. In the course of making his plea Cuero admitted to a previous conviction for residential burglary, which qualified as a predicate offense or “strike” under California’s “three strikes” law. After the plea but before sentencing, however, the prosecution realized that another of Cuero’s previous convictions counted as a second such strike. Over Cuero’s objection, the trial court granted the prosecution’s motion to amend its criminal complaint to add the additional strike--but also permitted Cuero to withdraw his guilty plea in light of the change. He ultimately entered a new guilty plea to the amended complaint, and the presence of the second strike exposed him to an enhanced sentence of a minimum of 25 years and a maximum of life imprisonment. Cuero was then sentenced to 25 years to life, the conviction and sentence were affirmed on direct appeal, and his state habeas petition was denied by the California Supreme Court.Cuero then sought habeas relief in federal district court, which denied his petition. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, however, reversed that judgment and held that the state trial court had “acted contrary to clearly established Supreme Court law” by refusing to enforce the original plea agreement with its 14-years-and-4 months maximum sentence. On November 9 the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Ninth Circuit and remanded the case. In a per curiam opinion, the Court held that the Ninth Circuit had erred when it held that “federal law” as interpreted by the Supreme Court “clearly” established that specific performance of the original plea agreement was constitutionally required. Our next case is Dunn v. Madison. In 2016, Vernon Madison petitioned an Alabama trial court to stay his death sentence after a series of recent strokes which, he argued, left him incompetent to be executed. Madison has been awaiting his death sentence since the 1980s, when he was convicted of capital murder. In Ford v. Wainwright and Panetti v. Quarterman the Supreme Court indicated that a person is entitled to relief if it could be proven that he “suffers from a mental illness which deprives [him] of the mental capacity to rationally understand that he is being executed as a punishment for a crime.” The trial court held a hearing to consider the testimony of two psychologists: one court-appointed and the other hired by Madison’s counsel. Although they acknowledged that Madison’s mental awareness and memory of past events may have declined post-stroke, both psychologists indicated that he could understand that Alabama was seeking retribution against him for his criminal act. The trial court denied Madison’s petition. Madison then sought habeas relief in federal district court, claiming that the state court had incorrectly applied Ford and Panetti and that its judgment was “based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented.” The District Court denied relief but a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit granted a certificate of appealability and reversed. As Madison no longer remembers committing his capital offense, the Eleventh Circuit reasoned, he cannot rationally understand the connection between his crime and his execution.The U.S. Supreme Court thereafter reversed the judgment of the Eleventh Circuit, explaining in a per curiam opinion that neither Panetti nor Ford “clearly established” that a prisoner is incompetent to be executed because of a failure to remember his commission of the crime, as distinct from a failure to rationally comprehend the concepts of crime and punishment as applied in his case. The state court, the Supreme Court held, did not apply Panetti or Ford unreasonably, nor rely upon an unreasonable assessment of the evidence before it. Madison therefore was not entitled to federal habeas relief. Justice Ginsburg, joined by Justices Breyer and Sotomayor, issued a concurring opinion. Justice Breyer also issued a concurring opinion.To discuss these cases, we have Kent Scheidegger, Legal Director of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation.

On November 6, 2017, the Supreme Court issued per curiam decisions in Kernan v. Cuero and Dunn v. Madison, both cases involving habeas petitions filed by state prisoners. In this episode, we will be discussing both decisions.Up first is Kernan v. Cuero. Michael Cuero pled guilty to two felony charges, on the understanding that the maximum prison time he faced was 14 years and 4 months. In the course of making his plea Cuero admitted to a previous conviction for residential burglary, which qualified as a predicate offense or “strike” under California’s “three strikes” law. After the plea but before sentencing, however, the prosecution realized that another of Cuero’s previous convictions counted as a second such strike. Over Cuero’s objection, the trial court granted the prosecution’s motion to amend its criminal complaint to add the additional strike--but also permitted Cuero to withdraw his guilty plea in light of the change. He ultimately entered a new guilty plea to the amended complaint, and the presence of the second strike exposed him to an enhanced sentence of a minimum of 25 years and a maximum of life imprisonment. Cuero was then sentenced to 25 years to life, the conviction and sentence were affirmed on direct appeal, and his state habeas petition was denied by the California Supreme Court.Cuero then sought habeas relief in federal district court, which denied his petition. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, however, reversed that judgment and held that the state trial court had “acted contrary to clearly established Supreme Court law” by refusing to enforce the original plea agreement with its 14-years-and-4 months maximum sentence. On November 9 the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Ninth Circuit and remanded the case. In a per curiam opinion, the Court held that the Ninth Circuit had erred when it held that “federal law” as interpreted by the Supreme Court “clearly” established that specific performance of the original plea agreement was constitutionally required. Our next case is Dunn v. Madison. In 2016, Vernon Madison petitioned an Alabama trial court to stay his death sentence after a series of recent strokes which, he argued, left him incompetent to be executed. Madison has been awaiting his death sentence since the 1980s, when he was convicted of capital murder. In Ford v. Wainwright and Panetti v. Quarterman the Supreme Court indicated that a person is entitled to relief if it could be proven that he “suffers from a mental illness which deprives [him] of the mental capacity to rationally understand that he is being executed as a punishment for a crime.” The trial court held a hearing to consider the testimony of two psychologists: one court-appointed and the other hired by Madison’s counsel. Although they acknowledged that Madison’s mental awareness and memory of past events may have declined post-stroke, both psychologists indicated that he could understand that Alabama was seeking retribution against him for his criminal act. The trial court denied Madison’s petition. Madison then sought habeas relief in federal district court, claiming that the state court had incorrectly applied Ford and Panetti and that its judgment was “based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented.” The District Court denied relief but a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit granted a certificate of appealability and reversed. As Madison no longer remembers committing his capital offense, the Eleventh Circuit reasoned, he cannot rationally understand the connection between his crime and his execution.The U.S. Supreme Court thereafter reversed the judgment of the Eleventh Circuit, explaining in a per curiam opinion that neither Panetti nor Ford “clearly established” that a prisoner is incompetent to be executed because of a failure to remember his commission of the crime, as distinct from a failure to rationally comprehend the concepts of crime and punishment as applied in his case. The state court, the Supreme Court held, did not apply Panetti or Ford unreasonably, nor rely upon an unreasonable assessment of the evidence before it. Madison therefore was not entitled to federal habeas relief. Justice Ginsburg, joined by Justices Breyer and Sotomayor, issued a concurring opinion. Justice Breyer also issued a concurring opinion.To discuss these cases, we have Kent Scheidegger, Legal Director of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation.

Christmasville is going on this weekend in Historic Old Town Rock Hill. Patti Panetti from the City of Rock Hill discusses the event and what you can expect,

With an execution looming, Dahlia Lithwick revisits Panetti v. Quarterman, a case involving mental illness and the death penalty. Her guests are Scott Panetti’s lawyer Kathryn Kase and Brandon Garrett of the University of Virginia. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices