Brief of Defendant-Appellant, Sam Sheppard, Eighth District Court of Appeals Case No. 23551

In their appeal (no. 23551) brief, Sam Sheppard\u27s attorneys asserted that he should be granted a new trial based on newly discovered evidence because the defense team did not have access to the crime scene until two days after the verdict finding him guilty. Once given access to the Sheppard home, the defense hired Dr. Paul Kirk for forensic testing and analysis. Dr. Kirk discovered blood on a wardrobe door at the murder scene that he claimed did not belong to Sam or Marilyn Sheppard. Kirk further determined that forensic evidence showed that the murderer was left-handed, excluding Sam as a suspect because he was right-handed. Dr. Kirk confirmed the defense theory that the murder was probably the result of a sexual attack

Appendix to Brief of Appellant: Motions for Leave to Appeal, Opinions and Journal Entries of the Court of Appeals

Appellant court documents filed with Ohio Supreme Cour

Reply Brief of Appellant on Motion for Leave to Appeal and Appeal as of Right

Reply Brief of Appellant on Motion for Leave to Appeal and Appeal as of Righ

Reply Brief of Appellant on Motion for Leave to Appeal and Appeal as of Right

Reply Brief of Appellant on Motion for Leave to Appeal and Appeal as of Righ

Management of chronic lateral instability due to lateral collateral ligament deficiency after total knee arthroplasty: a case report

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>Lateral instability following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a rare condition with limited report of treatment options. The objective of this case presentation is to demonstrate the outcomes of different surgical procedures performed in a single patient with lateral collateral ligament (LCL) deficiency.</p> <p>Case presentation</p> <p>We present a case of chronic lateral instability due to LCL deficiency after primary TKA in a 47-year-old Caucasian woman with an obesity problem. Multiple treatment options have been performed in order to manage this problem, including the following: ligament reconstruction; combined ligament reconstruction and constrained implant; and rotating-hinge knee prosthesis that was the most recent surgery. All ligament reconstruction procedures failed within one year. The varus-valgus constrained prosthesis provided stability for six years.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Ligament reconstruction alone cannot provide enough stability for the treatment of chronic lateral instability in patients with obesity problems and LCL deficiency. When the reconstruction fails, a salvage procedure with rotating-hinge knee is still available.</p