Here is a link to CBS’s petition to CAAF in CBS Broadcasting, Inc. v. NMCCA et al., previously discussed by CAAFlog here, here, and . . . you get the picture (search for “CBS” on CAAFlog). I wanted to point out the very authoritative citation on page 26, footnote 11. This is a slam dunk with that authority!

CAAFlog will have more later.

11 Responses to “CBS Petition in SSgt Wuterich case”

  1. Anonymous says:

    Frankly, that is the type of citation that is going to annoy an appellate court. With all due respect to CAAFlog, using an opinion on a blog cite weakens one’s argument and demonstrates a level of flippancy I’m sure the CAAF will appreciate.

  2. Anonymous says:

    How is this even writ-worthy?

  3. No Man says:

    1732 Anon:

    Not sure you took the post in the spirit it was meant, but you have encapsulated the subtext of our post.

  4. Tony Cossio says:

    I wonder how many cases cite a blog as authority…

    no man, I am sure anon caught the satire and sarcasm of the post. Bypassing that, he is right, it would either annoy or alienate an appellant court.

    It’s funny nevertheless. What’s next, citations based off graffiti from bathroom stalls? They may as well cite their own rhetoric from their press conferences.

  5. Anonymous says:

    Once again, the MC is chasing ghosts. You’d think they would have gotten the hint by now with all the oh-so-common CA dismissals of charges…

  6. dreadnaught says:

    In US v. Parker, NMCCA used the following citation:

    “The website for the Death Penalty Information Center, (2007) lists 26 states with statutes defining mental retardation.”

    It would have been much more appropriate to list the statutes of the various states.

    For an even better – or worse – citation see
    the brief from the Virginia Capital Representation Resource Center:

    “Since the grant of certiorari in Baze, some commentators have suggested that other controlled substances could be used in lieu of a barbiturate to cause painless death. See, e.g., The Interesting Case of Baze v. Rees,, archived entry posted 12/31/2007 at 1:09 a.m., comment #8 by BruceM (speaking, with some apparent authority, in favor of using potent opioid to accomplish lethal injection).”

    A comment on a blog, with “some apparent authority.” Wow, that is persuasive.

  7. Jason Grover says:

    I’m thinking about citing Senior Judge Sullivan’s book in a future brief if I can find a way to fit it in.

  8. Anonymous says:

    Dreadnaught, thanks. That was entertaining.


  9. Anonymous says:

    The snobbery against Internet sources will dwindle over time. I guess I’m younger than the critics, because website citations do not bother me in the slightest.

  10. Anonymous says:

    Maybe we can start citing to Myspace pages? There is no verification of a website. Anyone can create one and say whatever they want. There is no scholarly review as in law reviews and there is no authority as in cases.

  11. Anonymous says:

    …Or wikipedia.

    Anon 05:04, their is no “snobbery”. It is Ok to use internet sources when it contains a published review. Not when it’s just someone’s opinion. A blog, no matter how entertaining and scholarly it’s authors opinions, is not peer-reviewed in the slightest.

    Their are some very good points raised in this blog, and the Ideas should be collected and formally published in a law review of some sort…Maybe a yearly review on some of the better topics and the great discussions and comments.

    And Anon 07:21:

    MySpace pages…No, it’s not a slippery-slope arguement. And yes, soon you will see a citation of MySpace pages…But not in the way you’re thinking of. Perhaps in an appeal I’m working on were it contains evidence of perjury. We’ll see in a couple of months.

    – Tony Cossio