Lodi News-Sentinel

July 19, 2001

 

Wendland right-to-life case raises new legal questions

By Shannon Darling/News-Sentinel staff writer

Legal questions linger after Tuesday’s death of Robert Wendland, a Stockton man embroiled in a right-to-life case currently under consideration by the California Supreme Court.

The court was expected to make a ruling Aug. 28 in Wendland’s case, which has garnered national media attention. Now the court must decide if the case is moot after Wendland’s death at Lodi Memorial Hospital.

Wendland, 49, died from complications from pneumonia. He suffered brain damage after a 1993 accident on an Interstate 5 on-ramp from Highway 12.

Wendland’s wife, Rose, and the lawyer for Florence Wendland, on opposite sides of the case, indicated Wednesday they would like to see the state Supreme Court make a ruling despite Robert’s death.

The case would set a statewide precedent for disconnecting life support.

While both sides are pushing for the court to make a ruling, some legal experts believe the case will be dropped.

“If the case were in federal court, the court would say the case was moot,” said Brian Landsberg, a professor of constitutional law at the University of the Pacific’s McGeorge School of Law in Sacramento.

However, the state is not bound by the same laws as federal courts, so the state Supreme Court could decide on the case, but it would become more of an ethical position than a legal case, Landsberg said. The case has prompted support from both pro-life and right-to-die groups.

The United States Supreme Court did rule on an issue rather than a person in the 1973 Roe vs. Wade case in which the court declared a Texas law outlawing abortion was unconstitutional, Landsberg said. The decision effectively legalized abortion.

The U.S. Supreme Court did not consider the issue moot even though Roe had already given birth.

“This issue was not moot because there were other women in a similar situation,” said Dana Cody, an attorney and spokesman for Life Legal Defense Foundation, the agency supporting Florence Wendland in her fight to keep the court from allowing her son’s feeding tube to be removed.

Cody makes the same argument for Wendland because others are in the state like Wendland who may want to live.

“He (and others) have the right to life,” Cody said.

Currently, the court is waiting to receive official notice of Wendland’s death. As of 4 p.m. Wednesday, the court was still waiting for that notice, said Lynn Holton, a Supreme Court spokeswoman. The court had also not received a motion to dismiss the case as of Wednesday.

“The matter is still pending,” Holton said. “The court could decide to dismiss the case on its own or issue a decision.”