郑州矫正眼镜(郑州眼睛息肉手术费用) (今日更新中)

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) -- The California Supreme Court overturned the 2005 death sentence for Scott Peterson in the slaying of his pregnant wife.The court says prosecutors may try again for the same sentence if they wish in the high-profile case. It upheld Peterson's 2004 conviction of murdering his wife Laci Peterson.Laci Peterson was eight months pregnant with their unborn son, and investigators said that on Christmas Eve in 2002, Scott Peterson dumped the bodies from his fishing boat into San Francisco Bay.The court on Monday said the trial judge made several significant errors in jury selection that undermined Peterson's right to an impartial jury at the penalty phase.The court ruled potential jurors for the death penalty phase were improperly dismissed after saying they disagreed with the death penalty but would be willing to impose it."The trial judge made a mistake by kicking those people off the jury, so the only people that sat on the jury were in the death penalty camp," said criminal defense attorney Gretchen von Helms.Prosecutors will now decide whether to retry the sentencing phase.While the sentence was overturned, the court affirmed the murder convictions. "The sentencing was a positive step. The other decision (convictions affirmed) was about what we expected. Now we go to the habeas appeal," said Lee Peterson, Peterson's father.The court will examine the case again when it decides a separate habeas corpus challenge, based on evidence. not presented at the original trial. Peterson's father declined to talk about the arguments in the appeal, but says he's expecting a development within the next four months.Peterson's family issued this full statement in response to the court's decision:Our family is sincerely grateful that the California Supreme Court recognized the injustice of Scott’s death penalty. For a long and difficult 18 years, we have believed unwaveringly in Scott’s innocence, so today’s decision by the court is a big step toward justice for Laci, Conner and Scott.Now our family will do two things: First, we wait for Stanislaus County District Attorney Birgit Fladager to decide whether to pursue a new penalty phase trial. If the DA elects to do so, a new jury would be seated, and they would hear all the evidence. They would then decide only Scott’s sentence: life without the possibility of parole or the death penalty. While we hope for the opportunity to present the new evidence to a jury, it is not likely that this penalty phase trial will happen. The case against Scott has weakened to the point where no jury would ever sentence him to death again and the District Attorney is aware of these facts.Second, we wait for the court to address the new forensic and eyewitness evidence we have submitted that shows Laci was alive the morning of December 24th and demonstrates Scott’s innocence. When the court reviews this in the coming months, we are confident they will grant Scott a new guilt phase trial.Our family has been deeply moved by the outpouring of support not only from family and friends but also from the hundreds of people from all walks of life who have shared their faith in Scott’s innocence. For more information on the case, please visit our website at ScottPetersonAppeal.org. 3275

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) -- Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed a bill that would have authorized California to give low-income immigrants 0 to buy groceries.It's unclear how much the bill would have cost; estimates range from the tens of millions of dollars to the hundreds of millions of dollars.Newsom said he could not sign the bill because it would put too much pressure on the state's budget.Lawmakers had to cover an estimated .3 billion budget deficit this year caused by the economic downturn brought by the coronavirus.Assemblyman Miguel Santiago, a Democrat from Los Angeles, authored the bill. 607

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Gavin Newsom is the favorite in California's governor's race, and if he's elected his extensive business holdings could present an ethics problem.His company, PlumpJack Group, owns wineries, bars, restaurants, hotels and liquor stores that operate in California. Issues involving the hospitality industry often come before the governor.Newsom is adamant he won't sell his interests but otherwise is deferring decisions about how to handle potential ethics conflicts until after the election.RELATED: John Cox, Gavin Newsom battle it out in debateThe potential for blurred lines between business and government service has become especially resonant since President Donald Trump broke with tradition for U.S. presidents and chose not to divest from his extensive holdings.Republican candidate John Cox also is a millionaire with extensive holdings, but his businesses operate outside California.RELATED: Republican gubernatorial candidate John Cox's plan for California 1012

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California lawmakers approved a multibillion-dollar plan Thursday to shore up the state's biggest electric utilities in the face of catastrophic wildfires and claims for damage from past blazes caused by their equipment.It requires major utilities to spend at least billion combined on safety improvements and meet new safety standards, and it creates a fund of up to billion that could help pay out claims as climate change makes wildfires across the U.S. West more frequent and more destructive.Lawmakers passed the bill less than a week after its final language went into print, and Gov. Gavin Newsom was expected to sign it Friday. Republicans and Democrats said the state needed to provide financial certainty to the state's investor-owned utilities, the largest of which, Pacific Gas & Electric Corp., is in bankruptcy.But they said their work is far from over and they plan to do more on wildfire prevention and home protection when they return in August from a summer break.A broad coalition rallied around the measure, from renewable energy trade groups and labor unions representing utility workers to survivors of recent fires caused by PG&E equipment. Victims applauded provisions they say will give them more leverage to get compensation from the company as it wades through bankruptcy.But several lawmakers raised concerns that the measure would leave utility customers on the hook for fires caused by PG&E despite questions about the company's safety record."No one has ever said this bill is going to be the silver bullet or fix all but it does take us in dramatic leaps to where we can stabilize California," said Assemblyman Chris Holden, a Democrat from Pasadena and one of the bill's authors.Holden and other supporters said the legislation would not raise electric rates for customers. But it would let utilities pass on the costs from wildfires to customers in certain cases, which would make costs rise.The legislation also extends an existing charge on consumers' electric bills to raise .5 billion for the fund that will cover costs from wildfires caused by the equipment of participating electric utilities.PG&E filed for bankruptcy in January, saying it could not afford billions in damages from recent deadly wildfires caused by downed power lines and other company equipment, including a November fire that killed 85 people and largely destroyed the town of Paradise.Credit ratings agencies also are eyeing the financial worthiness of Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric.PG&E did not take a formal position on the bill. Spokesman Lynsey Paulo said the utility is committed to resolving victims' claims and reducing wildfire risks.To use the fund, companies would have to meet new safety standards to be set by state regulators and take steps such as tying executive compensation to safety. The state's three major utilities could elect to contribute an additional .5 billion to create a larger insurance fund worth at least billion.Questions about PG&E's efforts to combat fires led to some opposition.A day before the legislation passed, a federal judge overseeing PG&E's bankruptcy ordered its lawyers to respond to a report in The Wall Street Journal that showed it knew about the risks of aging equipment but did not replace systems that could cause wildfires."It is hard not to see this bill as something of a reward for monstrous behavior. They haven't done the work. They should not be rewarded," said Assemblyman Marc Levine, a Democrat from San Rafael who voted against the legislation.David Song, a spokesman for Southern California Edison, said the utility supports the bill but wants to see "refinements." He offered no specifics."If the bills are signed into law they take initial steps to return California to a regulatory framework providing the financial stability utilities require to invest in safety and reliability," he said.___Associated Press writer Adam Beam contributed. 4026

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Gov. Gavin Newsom has approved legislation prompted by the helicopter crash that killed Kobe Bryant and eight others.The bill signed Monday makes it a crime for first responders to take unauthorized photos of deceased people at the scene of an accident or crime.Reports surfaced after the January 26 crash that graphic photos of the victims were being shared. Eight deputies were accused of taking or sharing graphic photos of the scene, Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva said then, adding that he had ordered the images deleted.Sheriff Villanueva said the department has a policy against taking and sharing crime scene photos, but it does not apply to accident scenes.The measure that will take effect Jan. 1 makes it a misdemeanor with fines up to ,000 per offense to take such photos for anything other than an official law enforcement purpose.Bryant’s widow, Vanessa Bryant, has sued the department over the photos. In her lawsuit, Bryant alleges that eight deputies took "gratuitous images" with their cell phones after responding to the scene.Bryant's suit also alleges that one of those deputies showed images from the scene to someone outside the department. According to Yahoo, that deputy showed photos from the scene to a person at a bar and bragged "about how he had been at the crash site." A bartender who overheard the conversation later notified the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department about the conversation. 1474

来源：资阳报