Police say the boy, a third-grader, confessed to planning and carrying out the shooting deaths of his father, Vincent Romero, 29, and a co-worker who rented a room from him. The men were found dead inside Romero's home northeast of Phoenix on Wednesday.

Authorities had no motive for the shootings.

"That's what's puzzling to us," Police Chief Roy Melnick said Monday on NBC's "Today" show. "There's no record of any problems in school, no reported abuse."

Romero came from a family of hunters and wanted to make sure the boy wasn't afraid of guns, said the Very Rev. John Paul Sauter of St. Johns Catholic Church. He said the father taught his son how to use a rifle to kill prairie dogs.

Police say the boy used a .22-caliber rifle to kill his father and the other man, Timothy Romans, 39, of San Carlos.

St. Johns police are hoping a judge will agree to try the boy as an adult but admit it's unlikely.

The boy's attorney says police questioned his client without representation from a parent or attorney and didn't advise the child of his rights.

The killings took place in the St. Johns, a town of about 4,000 people some 170 miles northeast of Phoenix.

Romero was well-liked and people here are likely turn out in droves for his funeral.

"Everybody here is heart-broken," Melnick said. "We are a close-knit community. A lot of friends and neighbors have pulled together."

The justices, in an order Monday, accepted the appeal of prosecutors in Alaska. They asked the court to overturn a federal appeals court ruling in favor of William Osborne, who was convicted of rape, kidnapping and assault in an attack on a prostitute in 1993.

The woman was raped at gunpoint, beaten with an ax handle, shot in the head and left for dead in a snow bank near the Anchorage International Airport.

Osborne admitted his guilt under oath to the parole board in 2004. Another man also convicted in the attack has repeatedly identified Osborne as having participated in the crimes. The testing would be done on a condom and hairs found by investigators.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in San Francisco, said Osborne has a right to subject the evidence to advanced DNA testing that was not available at the time of his trial.

Forty-four states and the federal government have laws that give convicts access to DNA testing, but Alaska does not.

Osborne urged the court to reject the appeal, saying that because so many states have laws on the topic, it rarely arises in federal court.

Prosecutors argued that even if testing determines that the hairs and sperm are not Osborne's, other evidence introduced at his trial is sufficient to leave his conviction in place. That matter is not before the high court.

The case is District Attorney's Office v. Osborne, 08-6.

Lawyer Dennis Leavitt also decried any suggestion that Julie Puffinburger might have been responsible for the abduction of her son Cole, after a police lieutenant told a judge she had previously spread hoax stories that the boy had been kidnapped.

Cole Puffinburger was taken by two men posing as police officers after they ransacked his mother's house in what police said was message from drug dealers to Cole's grandfather. The boy was found safe four days later.

Police did not immediately respond to requests to confirm Leavitt's account that Julie Puffinburger received an ominous written message directed at her father, Clemens Fred Tinnemeyer.

Police have alleged that Tinnemeyer, 51, disappeared in May after stealing millions of dollars in drug proceeds from "Mexican nationals" and methamphetamine traffickers. He is in federal custody in California as a material witness in the kidnapping case.

Leavitt said in an e-mail to The Associated Press that two detectives who met with Julie Puffinburger about the July 13 warning note "stated they could not do anything because there was no imminent threat and advised Julie to buy a shotgun." Leavitt said she did not buy a weapon.

Several justices indicated that if the U.S. Food and Drug Administration had clear information about the risks of Wyeth Pharmaceuticals' anti-nausea drug Phenergan, and approved its warning label anyway, then Wyeth probably would prevail in its court fight against Diana Levine of Vermont.

But there was considerable skepticism among the justices — and disagreement between the opposing lawyers — that the FDA had a clear picture of the disastrous consequences of improperly giving Phenergan by an intravenous method of injection known as IV push, the fastest way to bring relief to nauseated patients.

"How could the FDA have concluded that IV push was safe and effective," Justice Samuel Alito asked, given that Phenergan is not a lifesaving drug and gangrene can result from improper administration?

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg chimed in, "No matter what benefit there was, how could the benefit outweigh that substantial risk?"

Levine, a guitar- and piano-playing musician from Vermont, was in the courtroom for Monday's arguments in Wyeth's appeal of a $6.7 million verdict she won from a state jury.

The jury agreed with Levine's claim that Wyeth failed to provide a strong and clear warning about the risks of IV push, which include that gangrene is likely if the injection accidentally hits an artery. That is precisely what happened to Levine.

The company appealed and, backed by the Bush administration, argued that once a drug's warning label gets FDA approval, consumers cannot pursue state law claims that they were harmed.

Cheng Chui Ping, better known by her nickname, Sister Ping, was sentenced to 35 years in prison, for heading a large alien smuggling operation. The justices did not comment Monday in denying her appeal of her money laundering conviction.

The conspiracy came to light only after the Golden Venture ran aground in New York City in 1993 in an attempt to unload the 295 passengers crammed inside. The ship's captain deliberately ran aground when no one showed up to meet the passengers. Ten immigrants died trying to swim to shore, while dozens suffered hypothermia and other injuries.

Prosecutors said Sister Ping was a key player in the conspiracy that exploited and abused immigrants, in many cases charging them tens of thousands of dollars for the trips, to be collected from their wages once they arrived in the United States.

Cities and municipalities across the country have adopted laws similar to the City of Hazleton's 2006 ordinance. However, a federal judge later called the Hazleton law unconstitutional, and its provisions are not being enforced.

On Thursday, a lawyer for the former coal town argued that the ordinance would not conflict with federal immigration policy set by Congress. But an American Civil Liberties Union lawyer argued that municipalities should not be allowed to set varying standards and restrictions for illegal immigrants.

Congress, in crafting U.S. immigration law, aims to strike a balance between the rights of immigrants, foreign policy concerns, national security and other competing interests, ACLU lawyer Omar C. Jadwat told the three-judge panel.

"That's going to be impossible if Hazleton and other cities strike their own balance," Jadwat said.

The city's Illegal Immigration Relief Act would impose fines on landlords who rent to illegal immigrants and deny business permits to companies that give them jobs. It would also require tenants to register with City Hall and pay for a rental permit.

A state law passed in 2005 that tries to limit access to such games is under consideration by a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The state law, which prohibits the sale or rental of the games to anyone under 18 and requires them to be clearly labeled, was struck down last year by a lower court. Video game manufacturers argued that it violates minors' First Amendment rights. Courts in several other states have struck down similar laws.

But California Deputy Attorney General Zackery Morazzini asked the federal appeals panel to uphold the law, saying violent games are just as obscene as the sexually explicit material limited from children by the U.S. Supreme Court.

He said states have every right to help parents who want to keep their children from playing violent video games.

The Video Software Dealers Association and Entertainment Software Association say imposing restrictions on video games could lead to states seeking limited access to other material under the guise of protecting children.