A decision on the appeal, known as a judicial review, is not expected for at least several weeks. "The decision makers are the judges at the Supreme Court," Abbas said today.

"The opinion from the district court has nothing to do with the case because they can only hear it, but they cannot make a decision. "It will not affect our case." The trio launched the appeal earlier this year.

In emotional appeals to the Denpasar District Court in June, they finally admitted their roles in the failed bid to smuggle heroin from Bali into Australia.

During the hearings, defence lawyers argued they should have faced charges under drug possession laws, which carry a maximum penalty of 10 years in jail, rather than drug export laws, which allow for death.

The appeal is the trio's final bid to beat the death penalty, other than an appeal to Indonesia's president for clemency.

Three other Australians facing the death penalty over the plot - Scott Rush, 21, and ringleaders Andrew Chan, 23, and Myuran Sukumaran, 26 - have also launched challenges, arguing Indonesia's Constitutional Court should scrap the death penalty because the nation's constitution affords life as a basic right. The case is due to resume in Jakarta next week, with a decision some weeks away.

Meanwhile, there could also be some movement in the cases of the remaining three members of the Bali Nine who are not facing death. Lawyers for Michael Czugaj, 22, and Martin Stephens, 31, said they would soon make a decision on whether to launch a final appeal against their life sentences.

"Next week I'm going to meet (Stephens's) family in Bali, and I'm going to see the situation for the judicial review," his lawyer Wirawan Adnan said. Czugaj's lawyer Frans Passar also confirmed his client was also weighing an appeal.

The only female in the group, Renae Lawrence, has ruled out an appeal against her 20-year term, but could have her sentence shaved by one or two months to mark Indonesia's Independence Day holiday on Friday.

Under the Indonesian system, all prisoners are eligible for remission on Independence Day and some religious holidays, if they have served at least six months of their sentence and are not sentenced to either life in prison or death.

The decision stemmed from a manslaughter case in which a lower court ruled that the results from a blood-alcohol test of a driver were unconstitutional and should be suppressed. The judge ruled that the test results violated the Fourth Amendment protection from "nonconsensual, warrantless and suspicionless searches."

The state appealed to the Maine Supreme Judicial Court. In a 34-page opinion, justices issued a 4-to-2 decision, vacating the ruling to suppress the evidence and sending the case back to the lower court for further proceedings.

Chief Justice Leigh Saufley wrote that the statute itself is constitutional and that the test results are admissible in court if the state demonstrates that the defendant consented to the test or there was probable cause to believe the driver was operating under the influence of drugs or alcohol.

Saufley further wrote that the state's need to obtain information about the intoxication of drivers involved in fatal accidents has to be balanced against the privacy interest of motorists. "We conclude that the state's interest in gathering information to assist in addressing the problem of intoxicated driving outweighs the privacy interest of drivers in the content of their blood," he wrote.

Richard Cormier of Gray was driving a car that was involved in a head-on collision on Route 85 in Raymond on May 11, 2003. An elderly couple from Gray was killed in the accident.

Cormier was transported by ambulance to a hospital, where his blood was drawn. The blood-alcohol content was 0.08 percent, meaning that he was legally intoxicated.

Cormier was later indicted on two counts of manslaughter and other charges, but he moved to suppress the results of the blood test in a court motion.

Justice Paul Fritzsche agreed, ruling that Cormier had not consented to the test and that there was not sufficient probable cause to believe he was operating under the influence.

Fritzsche found the only justification for the blood test was the state law that mandates a test when an accident has resulted in a fatality. He cited a US Supreme Court decision in declaring the test results as inadmissible in court.

Supreme Court Justices Jon Levy and Susan Calkins disagreed with the majority opinion.

"The majority's opinion leads the law into new, uncharted territory in which probable cause, a cornerstone of the Fourth Amendment, plays a secondary, after-the-fact role," Levy wrote.

"Notwithstanding [the statute's] proper and noble purpose, I conclude that to the extent the statute authorizes searches and seizures based on after-acquired probable cause, the statute is unconstitutional."

Leveraging Entrust Entelligence Messaging Server, Charles Russell is now able to provide its customers full encryption for e-mails containing sensitive data. Further, those clients can benefit from e-mail encryption regardless of their own capabilities. To streamline protocol, the firm will place e-mail encryption policy management in the hands of the organization's IT department, freeing lawyers from the burden of encrypting confidential information during electronic communication.

"In an industry that is constantly viewing, storing and managing extremely sensitive client information, the ability to seamlessly encrypt e-mails will increase efficiency and help guarantee compliance with regulatory mandates," said Charles Russell IT Director Jon Gould. "Not only did Entrust's e-mail encryption solution solve our security requirements, but their reputation and expertise in this field only confirmed our decision."

A testament to Entrust's heritage, Charles Russell was attracted to the standards-based credential management technology within Entrust Entelligence Messaging Server. The solution automates harvesting of certificate credentials, and boundary deployment eliminates lawyer intervention, one of the initial requirements of the firm. As a standards-based credential management solution, Entrust Entelligence Messaging Server delivers a technology that can evolve as the practice's security goals change over time.

"For an organization whose business revolves entirely around sensitive or private information, seamless e-mail encryption is a much-needed asset," said Entrust Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer Bill Conner. "A key component of a strategic layered security approach, Entrust Entelligence Messaging Server will afford Charles Russell clients, and its workforce, an invaluable peace of mind. And, as security goals evolve, more solutions can be introduced to help realize the objective of a comprehensive layered security model."

Entrust Entelligence Messaging Server is an e-mail security solution that makes it easier to communicate securely with external business partners, customers and clients. Part of Entrust's Information Protection Platform, the solution is shipped as a hardware appliance and delivers standards-based e-mail encryption capabilities in a comprehensive solution. In addition, it's easy to deploy and maintain for organizations that communicate sensitive or regulated information -- both inside and outside their organization -- via e-mail.

U.K.-based Charles Russell is a top-50, full-service legal practice with offices in London, Guildford, Cheltenham, Cambridge, Oxford and Geneva. The firm boasts the expertise and size to advise on complex, cross-border transactions and to manage the input of international networks of major law firms. The organization's clients range from international, FTSE and AIM- listed businesses to governments, not-for-profit bodies, private individuals, trustees and intermediaries.

About Entrust

Entrust secures digital identities and information for consumers, enterprises and governments in 1,650 organizations spanning 60 countries. Leveraging a layered security approach to address growing risks, Entrust solutions help secure the most common digital identity and information protection pain points in an organization. These include SSL, authentication, fraud detection, shared data protection and e-mail security. For information, call 888-690-2424, e-mail entrust@entrust.com or visit http://www.entrust.com.

Entrust is a registered trademark of Entrust, Inc. in the United States and certain other countries. In Canada, Entrust is a registered trademark of Entrust Limited. All Entrust product names are trademarks or registered trademarks of Entrust, Inc. or Entrust Limited. All other company and product names are trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners.

"It was wrong and I accept full responsibility for this action," Thomas told a news conference. "I will continue to work for the city I love and I have made peace with my God."

Thomas, a councilman for 13 years and a leading voice for the recovery of the city from the devastation of Hurricane Katrina in 2005, had been expected to be a strong candidate for mayor when the city picks a successor to Ray Nagin in 2010.

Before U.S. District Judge Sarah Vance, Thomas pleaded guilty to bribery and faces up to 10 years in prison and $250,000 in fines. However, he has agreed to cooperate with federal prosecutors in an ongoing investigation into corruption in New Orleans.

"This guilty plea is a body blow to a community that is already reeling under a wave of public corruption," Vance said at the hearing. "If this city is ever to recover, we have to have an end to this kind of venality."

Thomas' troubles are the latest in a city and state, Louisiana, with a history of corruption in politics.

U.S. Rep. William Jefferson, a Democrat from New Orleans, was indicted in June on corruption charges linked to business deals in Africa.

Investigators found $90,000 in cash in the freezer of his Washington-area home. Jefferson has denied any wrongdoing.

U.S. Sen. David Vitter, a Republican from the New Orleans suburbs, admitted last month to having committed a "very serious sin" after his number was found in the phone records of a woman accused of running a Washington prostitution ring.

The named plaintiff, James Van Horn, filed the suit on behalf of himself and all others who purchased a ticket on Korean Air from January 1, 2000 until at least July 16, 2006, said HBBS.

HBSS managing partner Steve Berman said that the Korean Air’s collusive activities could have affected numerous passengers in both Korea and the U.S., and that HBSS wants those customers to be rightfully reimbursed.

KAL conceded that the airline company is facing a class action suit brought by American consumers and hinted that it will seek a legal response.