Appellate Practice

Court Crafts 'Dangerous Quadriplegic' Doctrine Despite 'Pigs Fly' Dissent

A California Court of Appeal majority has crafted what Legal Blog Watch is calling the “dangerous quadriplegic” doctrine, citing a 22-year-old newspaper article about a disabled man who allegedly shot his bride by using his mouth to pull a string tied to the trigger as justification for its refusal to release a wheelchair-bound inmate on humanitarian grounds.

The dissent in Martinez v. Board of Parole Hearings (PDF) argued in vain that such incidents are rarities and that “with the help of a good Internet search engine, you can prove anything, including that pigs can fly,” writes Bruce Carton. The dissenting judge had to go back only a few months to find a United Kingdom newspaper article referencing airborne porkers propelled by a trampoline.

Hat tip: Above the Law and Lowering the Bar.

We welcome your comments, but please adhere to our comment policy and the ABA Code of Conduct.

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.