<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 0 for 11: Appellate Court ARO 12/5/07</title>
	<atom:link href="http://apublicdefender.com/2007/12/05/0-for-11-appellate-court-aro-12507/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://apublicdefender.com/2007/12/05/0-for-11-appellate-court-aro-12507/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 19:28:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Gideon</title>
		<link>http://apublicdefender.com/2007/12/05/0-for-11-appellate-court-aro-12507/comment-page-1/#comment-10598</link>
		<dc:creator>Gideon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2007 20:40:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://apublicdefender.com/2007/12/05/0-for-11-appellate-court-aro-12507/#comment-10598</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t understand...that&#039;s what it said in the decision I read and quoted above: &quot;incongruity&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t understand&#8230;that&#8217;s what it said in the decision I read and quoted above: &#8220;incongruity&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Federal Farmer</title>
		<link>http://apublicdefender.com/2007/12/05/0-for-11-appellate-court-aro-12507/comment-page-1/#comment-10597</link>
		<dc:creator>Federal Farmer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2007 20:33:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://apublicdefender.com/2007/12/05/0-for-11-appellate-court-aro-12507/#comment-10597</guid>
		<description>Another let down for you...

In the published version of the opinion in State v. Carmona, the Appellate Court significantly toned down its criticism of the State.

The State is no longer accused of a misrepresentation, and the Commissioner of Correction is mildly rebuked with being incongruous.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another let down for you&#8230;</p>
<p>In the published version of the opinion in State v. Carmona, the Appellate Court significantly toned down its criticism of the State.</p>
<p>The State is no longer accused of a misrepresentation, and the Commissioner of Correction is mildly rebuked with being incongruous.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan Schwartz</title>
		<link>http://apublicdefender.com/2007/12/05/0-for-11-appellate-court-aro-12507/comment-page-1/#comment-9518</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Schwartz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Dec 2007 02:56:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://apublicdefender.com/2007/12/05/0-for-11-appellate-court-aro-12507/#comment-9518</guid>
		<description>So many criminal law decisions. Can&#039;t they throw an interesting employment law case every once in a while? I&#039;ll even take a few noteworthy civil cases...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So many criminal law decisions. Can&#8217;t they throw an interesting employment law case every once in a while? I&#8217;ll even take a few noteworthy civil cases&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.473 seconds -->
