Courtesy of Acting Assistant Attorney General Mary Lou Leary of the Office of Justice Programs (OJP) As we pause to commemorate Missing Children’s Day on May 25, we remember the high profile disappearances of six-year-old Etan Patz on May 25, 1979, of Adam Walsh in 1981, and the murders of 29 children in Atlanta, which [...]
Honoring Persistence: National Missing Children’s Day, May 25
↧
↧
Monnery on the Determinants of Recidivism in France
Benjamin Monnery (University of Lyon 2 - Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique (GATE)) has posted The Determinants of Recidivism among Ex-Prisoners: A Survival Analysis on French Data on SSRN. Here is the abstract: This article explores the main determinants...
↧
New England Traffic Safety Watch: Memorial Day Drunk Driving Safety Tips
Memorial Day is the unofficial kickoff to summer and is a time to celebrate freedom and honor veterans. Unfortunately, it is also a time when parties can get out of control and people can be in danger as a result of drunk driving. ![1285084_flag.jpg]()
If you are having a party this weekend or have friends who are heading out to celebrate, it is important to make smart choices when it comes to drinking and driving. Our Boston drunk driving accident lawyers also urge all drivers on the road to exercise caution over Memorial Day weekend since the number of drunk driving accidents goes up considerably during this holiday celebration.
Memorial Day Drunk Driving Dangers
According to Mothers Against Drunk Driving, there were more than 470 people killed in car accidents in 2009 over Memorial Day weekend. Many of these accidents occurred as a result of people driving after they had too much to drink.
Far too many people get caught up in the celebration of summer, enjoying a couple of drinks at barbecues, pool parties, picnics and other Memorial Day special events. Unfortunately, when driving home from these Memorial Day celebrations, intoxicated drivers endanger themselves and endanger other people who may happen to be on the road at the same time.
Tips for Staying Safe
Those who are attending or hosting Memorial Day parties should keep some basic tips in mind to try to reduce the number of injuries or fatalities that occur over this holiday weekend. For example:Party hosts should serve alcohol early in the day if they plan to make alcohol available and should considering switching to coffee, tea and other non-alcoholic beverage options a few hours before people plan to leave. This will allow people to enjoy alcoholic drinks but not to drink too much or too close to the time when they need to drive home. Party hosts should be sure to make plenty of non-alcoholic drinks available to designated drivers who attend gatherings. Party hosts should not let anyone leave their home in a car if that person is too intoxicated to drive. Call a cab, drive the guest home yourself or even invite them to stay over before letting someone get into a car drunk. Anyone out celebrating should be sure to have a designated driver with them. Do not make the mistake of assuming you can have just a drink, stop and be able to drive home if you know that you have not been able to do this in the past. Instead, plan ahead so you can have a good time without worrying about how you'll get back home. Others who are out on the roads also need to be aware that there are more drunk drivers during the holiday weekend than at other times. Refrain from doing a lot of unnecessary driving, especially late in the evening when parties are letting out, and be on the lookout for intoxicated drivers. If you see something wrong or suspect another driver is intoxicated, considering calling the police to let them know. By helping to get drunk drivers off the road, you could save a life over Memorial Day.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
If you are having a party this weekend or have friends who are heading out to celebrate, it is important to make smart choices when it comes to drinking and driving. Our Boston drunk driving accident lawyers also urge all drivers on the road to exercise caution over Memorial Day weekend since the number of drunk driving accidents goes up considerably during this holiday celebration.
Memorial Day Drunk Driving Dangers
According to Mothers Against Drunk Driving, there were more than 470 people killed in car accidents in 2009 over Memorial Day weekend. Many of these accidents occurred as a result of people driving after they had too much to drink.
Far too many people get caught up in the celebration of summer, enjoying a couple of drinks at barbecues, pool parties, picnics and other Memorial Day special events. Unfortunately, when driving home from these Memorial Day celebrations, intoxicated drivers endanger themselves and endanger other people who may happen to be on the road at the same time.
Tips for Staying Safe
Those who are attending or hosting Memorial Day parties should keep some basic tips in mind to try to reduce the number of injuries or fatalities that occur over this holiday weekend. For example:Party hosts should serve alcohol early in the day if they plan to make alcohol available and should considering switching to coffee, tea and other non-alcoholic beverage options a few hours before people plan to leave. This will allow people to enjoy alcoholic drinks but not to drink too much or too close to the time when they need to drive home. Party hosts should be sure to make plenty of non-alcoholic drinks available to designated drivers who attend gatherings. Party hosts should not let anyone leave their home in a car if that person is too intoxicated to drive. Call a cab, drive the guest home yourself or even invite them to stay over before letting someone get into a car drunk. Anyone out celebrating should be sure to have a designated driver with them. Do not make the mistake of assuming you can have just a drink, stop and be able to drive home if you know that you have not been able to do this in the past. Instead, plan ahead so you can have a good time without worrying about how you'll get back home. Others who are out on the roads also need to be aware that there are more drunk drivers during the holiday weekend than at other times. Refrain from doing a lot of unnecessary driving, especially late in the evening when parties are letting out, and be on the lookout for intoxicated drivers. If you see something wrong or suspect another driver is intoxicated, considering calling the police to let them know. By helping to get drunk drivers off the road, you could save a life over Memorial Day.
↧
Edison Cop Charged with Attempted Murder after Allegedly Firebombing Superior’s Home
NJ Police Officer Charged with Attempted Murder and Arson A veteran Edison Police officer, Michael Dotro, was charged with multiple counts of attempted murder following and investigation by the Middlesex County Prosecutor’s Office. The allegations are that he firebombed the home of his superior while the family, including his children and 92 year-old mother, slept […]![]()
↧
Appling v State - A12A2137 - 4 Officers not Custody for Miranda during DUI stop
In Appling v. State, A12A2137, March 14, 2013, the Georgia Court of Appeals held that when Officers do not tell you that you are drunk, they intend to arrest you, put you in a police cruiser, hand cuff you, wait in a specific location for a more experienced officer then you are not in custody for purposes of Miranda warnings even if your freedom of movement is restricted and there are four officers on the scene. The test is whether an ordinary reasonable person would believe the detention to be more than temporary in nature. The Court of Appeals held that because the issue of custody for purposes of Miranda is a mixed question of law, the Hall County Trial Court's determination will not be disturbed unless it is clearly erroneous. The Trial Judge of the State Court of Hall County in Gainesville Georgia was affirmed and the DUI jury verdict stands.
↧
↧
Property Damage Crash near American Falls - Update
IDAHO STATE POLICE NEWS RELEASE - generated by our News Release ListServer
DO NOT REPLY
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Idaho State Police
District 5 5205 South 5th Ave.
Pocatello, Idaho 83204-2299
(208) 236-6466 FAX: (208) 236-6068
For Immediate Release: 05/24/2013 2:29 pm
Please direct questions to the District Office
*****UPDATE*****
All eastbound lanes of travel are open at this time.
*****UPDATE*****
Idaho State Police is currently investigating a one vehicle property damage crash on I86 near milepost 25, approximately 15 miles west of American Falls. Expect delays in the eastbound lanes of travel. More information will be released as it becomes available.
-------------
↧
Westen on Transferred Intent
Peter K. Westen (University of Michigan Law School) has posted The Significance of Transferred Intent (Criminal Law and Philosophy, vol. 7, pp. 321-50 (2013)) on SSRN. Here is the abstract: The doctrine of transferred intent (or “transferred malice” in England)...
↧
What happens if I do not request a Department of Licensing Hearing within 20 days?
Your Washington State driver's license will be suspended or revoked (revoked if 1 year or more) 60 calender days from the date of your arrest. If you miss the 20-day deadline you are out of luck. The length of suspension...
↧
Creel on Counsel for Indians in Tribal Courts
Barbara Creel (University of New Mexico School of Law) has posted The Right to Counsel for Indians Accused of Crime: A Tribal and Congressional Imperative (Michigan Journal of Race & Law, Vol. 18, p. 317, Spring 2013) on SSRN. Here...
↧
↧
Saglibene on the U.K. Bribery Act and U.S. Law Reform
Dominic Saglibene has posted The U.K. Bribery Act: A Benchmark for Anticorruption Reform in the U.S. (Transnational Law & Contemporary Problems, Vol. 23, 2014 (Forthcoming)) on SSRN. Here is the abstract: This Note will argue that the U.S. should look...
↧
Property Damage Crash near American Falls - Final Update
IDAHO STATE POLICE NEWS RELEASE - generated by our News Release ListServer
DO NOT REPLY
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Idaho State Police
District 5 5205 South 5th Ave.
Pocatello, Idaho 83204-2299
(208) 236-6466 FAX: (208) 236-6068
For Immediate Release: 05/24/2013 at 7:25 p.m.
Please direct questions to the District Office
*****FINAL UPDATE*****
On May 24, 2013, at approximately 2:00 p.m., the Idaho State Police investigated a one vehicle property damage crash on Interstate 86 at milepost 25, west of American Falls. Loni McCloud, age 46 of Mountain Home, was driving eastbound in a 2003 Ford F250 pulling a 1990 Fleetwood trailer, when his trailer overturned. High gusts of wind were reported in the area.
The eastbound lanes of travel were blocked for approximately two hours. McCloud was wearing his seatbelt. The crash is under investigation by the Idaho State Police.
*****FINAL UPDATE*****
*****UPDATE*****
All eastbound lanes of travel are open at this time.
*****UPDATE*****
Idaho State Police is currently investigating a one vehicle property damage crash on I86 near milepost 25, approximately 15 miles west of American Falls. Expect delays in the eastbound lanes of travel. More information will be released as it becomes available.
-------------
↧
Sen David Vitter's proposed changes to food stamp program would force some felons to go hungry: Jarvis DeBerry
5-24-2013 Washington DC:
Given his professed Christianity, it's a shock that U.S. Sen. David Vitter seems so unfamiliar with the concept of mercy. Given his admission to a "very serious sin" --...
[[This,an article summary.Please visit my website for complete article, and more.]]
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
↧
Critics Blast US Farm Subsidy Recipient Rep. Stephen Fincher For Backing Food Stamp Cuts
5-24-2013 Washington DC:
Rep. Stephen Fincher, R-Tenn., is refusing to respond to critics who accuse him of receiving millions of dollars in farm subsidies while supporting billions of dollars in...
[[This,an article summary.Please visit my website for complete article, and more.]]
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
↧
↧
Los Angeles DUI Charges for Comedian Kevin Hart – “This Is a Wakeup Call”
Thirty-two-year old comedian Kevin Hart (“Laugh at My Pain”) was arrested on suspicion of Los Angeles DUI on the 101 last Sunday morning. ![Kevin%20Hart%20DUI-los-angeles.jpg]()
According to local reports, a CHP officer pulled over Hart’s black Mercedes, after the officer saw Hart driving at over 90 miles per hour – nearly smashing into a tanker truck in the process.
Mr. Hart was put through the paces of a Los Angeles field sobriety test, which he allegedly failed. Police arrested him for misdemeanor DUI, and he posted a $5,000 bond that day. A female passenger in the Mercedes went home in a taxi cab. Hart took to Twitter the day after his arrest with a mea culpa: “this is a wakeup call for me… I have to be smarter & last night I wasn’t. Everything happens for a reason.”
Hart’s arrest prompted snarky responses from fellow comedians, including Damon Wayans. The actor has appeared in multiple movies as well as the TV show, Undeclared.
Driving DUI in Los Angeles
While Hart’s attempt to “come clean” and express regret for what happened is in many ways admirable, prosecutors take Los Angles DUI charges deadly seriously. After all, driving under the influence increases your risk of getting into injury crashes and causing substantial damage to public and private property. The city and state both have great interest in reducing DUI incidences, and violators can be punished with a spectrum of unpleasantries, including jail time, fines, fees, miscellaneous court costs, mandatory interlock ignition device installation, and harsh probation terms. Those punishments don’t even touch on the other scary long-term implications.
A DUI conviction can make any subsequent criminal act much more “punishable” – prosecutors like to bring the hammer down harder on recidivist offenders. It can also spike your insurance rates and damage and disrupt relationships.
The road back may not be easy, simple, or fast. But there are correct strategic paths and less effective ones.
The team here at the Kraut Law Group is extremely experienced at helping drivers like you understand and come to terms with charges and make intelligent decisions going forward. Get in touch with the Harvard Law School educated ex-prosecutor Kraut today for insightful assistance with your DUI in Los Angeles.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
According to local reports, a CHP officer pulled over Hart’s black Mercedes, after the officer saw Hart driving at over 90 miles per hour – nearly smashing into a tanker truck in the process.
Mr. Hart was put through the paces of a Los Angeles field sobriety test, which he allegedly failed. Police arrested him for misdemeanor DUI, and he posted a $5,000 bond that day. A female passenger in the Mercedes went home in a taxi cab. Hart took to Twitter the day after his arrest with a mea culpa: “this is a wakeup call for me… I have to be smarter & last night I wasn’t. Everything happens for a reason.”
Hart’s arrest prompted snarky responses from fellow comedians, including Damon Wayans. The actor has appeared in multiple movies as well as the TV show, Undeclared.
Driving DUI in Los Angeles
While Hart’s attempt to “come clean” and express regret for what happened is in many ways admirable, prosecutors take Los Angles DUI charges deadly seriously. After all, driving under the influence increases your risk of getting into injury crashes and causing substantial damage to public and private property. The city and state both have great interest in reducing DUI incidences, and violators can be punished with a spectrum of unpleasantries, including jail time, fines, fees, miscellaneous court costs, mandatory interlock ignition device installation, and harsh probation terms. Those punishments don’t even touch on the other scary long-term implications.
A DUI conviction can make any subsequent criminal act much more “punishable” – prosecutors like to bring the hammer down harder on recidivist offenders. It can also spike your insurance rates and damage and disrupt relationships.
The road back may not be easy, simple, or fast. But there are correct strategic paths and less effective ones.
The team here at the Kraut Law Group is extremely experienced at helping drivers like you understand and come to terms with charges and make intelligent decisions going forward. Get in touch with the Harvard Law School educated ex-prosecutor Kraut today for insightful assistance with your DUI in Los Angeles.
↧
Woman celebrating post-DUI return of license arrested for a new DUI
A suburban Chicago woman was arrested for Driving Under the Influence, also known as DUI, DWI or drunk driving. She was just coming off a previous DUI and told police she out celebrating the fact her Illinois driver's license suspension had just ended.
The DUI arrest for which she had just completed a suspension occurred in 2012. Since news reports indicated she was driving under a permit that required the installation of an Interlock device, the 2012 offense would have to have been her only offense in the past five years.
A DUI "suspension" relates to the consequences of either taking a blood or breath test and registering .08 or greater, or refusing to take any test. A suspension is for a specific period of time and ends automatically without an administrative hearing with the Illinois Secretary of State.
Suspensions are for different lengths. How long depends upon whether there was a test and upon whether the accused is a "first offender' under the statutory summary suspension law. As defined by that law, a first offender is someone who has not had a DUI arrest in the prior five years. 625 ILCS 5/11-500
Therefore, her suspension, which started 46 days after the arrest if she tested, would have been for 6 months, or 12 months if she refused. Had she been a non-first offender, or in other words, had a DUI arrest in the last five years, her suspension would have been for 1 year or 3 years, depending upon whether she tested.
Only first offenders are allowed to drive during a suspension. The permit that allows them to do so is known as a Monitoring Device Driving Permit (MDDP). 625 ILCS 5/6-206.1 The MDDP forbids an offender from operating a vehicle that does not have an Interlock device installed.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
↧
Statewide Arizona DUI Enforcement Increased over Memorial Day Weekend
DUI one of four main causes of fatal and serious auto accidents on Arizona roadways.
![298987_bbq_1.jpg]()
Enforcement of Arizona's tough DUI laws tend to ramp up in May, especially over Memorial Day weekend and around graduation festivities. Last year, police arrested 3,129 people for DUIs between May 1 and May 31st, 556 of those arrests were made over Memorial Day weekend.
Police agencies statewide have joined together over the past month to patrol for people who are drinking and driving. These efforts are funded by grants from the Governor's Office of Highway Safety, which also funds training for field sobriety tests, blood draws, drug recognition and equipment.
Tempe Police is at least one law enforcement agency that announced heightening enforcement from May 24th through May 27th. They have committed increased patrols and mobile units throughout the city and will be saturated in downtown Tempe AZ. Minor Consumption violations and prevention are a main focus.
Arizona Department of Public Safety (DPS) reported that last year at this time 5 fatalities resulted from 4 separate collisions, and 85 people were injured. Arizona DPS indicated that impaired driving due to alcohol or drugs was one of 4 main causes of fatalities and serious injuries. Other causes included speeding, seat belt violations, and fatigue or drowsy driving. It announced late last week that it will be "especially vigilant" on the state's highways for this weekend to reduce the number of fatalities, injuries, traffic, and impaired driving violations. The AZ DPS reminds everyone to be patient on the roadway while driving, get enough rest before trips, and obey traffic and seat belt laws, and refrain from drinking and driving.
Tips from the police for the weekend include using public transportation or a completely sober designated driver. All drivers should be aware that in Arizona, adults can be arrested for drunk driving even if their Blood Alcohol Content (BAC) is below .08, if they are impaired to the slightest degree by the amount they drank.
Over Memorial Day weekend, particularly at family outings, some parents may let their older teenagers drink. While some states allow those under 21 to have a BAC of .01 or .02, Arizona has a zero tolerance policy for drunk drivers under the age of 21. Those under 21 may not even have even a BAC of .01%. A relatively recent case looked at the issue of blood tests for BAC for juvenile drivers, and the facts of the case are worth considering if you are a teenager or a parent.
In that case, a monitor at a seventeen-year-old defendant's school smelled marijuana on his clothing in 2012. The monitor searched the vehicle the defendant and his friends had driven to school and found drug paraphernalia. School officials reported this to the police and the sheriff arrived and advised the defendant of his Miranda rights. Nonetheless the defendant admitted that he and his friends had smoked marijuana away from campus and driven back.
The defendant was arrested and charged with drunk driving. The sheriff read him admonitions related to the implied consent law for blood tests and the defendant agreed to submit to testing. His parents were called and came to the school. Meanwhile, the defendant's blood was tested without his parent's consent. His parents were told he was caught smoking marijuana and arrested, but weren't asked for permission to test the blood that had been drawn.
Before a delinquency hearing, the defendant moved to suppress the blood test results. He argued that, as a minor, he lacked the legal ability to consent to testing. The juvenile court granted his motion, reasoning that the Arizona Parents' Bill of Rights includes the right to consent before a minor's blood is tested, notwithstanding Arizona's implied consent law. It also found that the defendant's consent hadn't been voluntary.
The State appealed the juvenile court's decision. The State argued that the Parents' Bill of Rights was inapplicable because the parental right to consent did not prevent law enforcement officers from acting in their official capacities within the scope of their authority.
The appellate court reasoned that anybody who operates a motor vehicle in Arizona, including minors, gives consent to alcohol testing of blood, breath and urine in the context of a DUI allegation. Although someone cannot be blood tested in a DUI stop without a warrant, drivers are already assumed to have given consent. They can withdraw the consent that has been given, but they face penalties for doing so.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Enforcement of Arizona's tough DUI laws tend to ramp up in May, especially over Memorial Day weekend and around graduation festivities. Last year, police arrested 3,129 people for DUIs between May 1 and May 31st, 556 of those arrests were made over Memorial Day weekend.
Police agencies statewide have joined together over the past month to patrol for people who are drinking and driving. These efforts are funded by grants from the Governor's Office of Highway Safety, which also funds training for field sobriety tests, blood draws, drug recognition and equipment.
Tempe Police is at least one law enforcement agency that announced heightening enforcement from May 24th through May 27th. They have committed increased patrols and mobile units throughout the city and will be saturated in downtown Tempe AZ. Minor Consumption violations and prevention are a main focus.
Arizona Department of Public Safety (DPS) reported that last year at this time 5 fatalities resulted from 4 separate collisions, and 85 people were injured. Arizona DPS indicated that impaired driving due to alcohol or drugs was one of 4 main causes of fatalities and serious injuries. Other causes included speeding, seat belt violations, and fatigue or drowsy driving. It announced late last week that it will be "especially vigilant" on the state's highways for this weekend to reduce the number of fatalities, injuries, traffic, and impaired driving violations. The AZ DPS reminds everyone to be patient on the roadway while driving, get enough rest before trips, and obey traffic and seat belt laws, and refrain from drinking and driving.
Tips from the police for the weekend include using public transportation or a completely sober designated driver. All drivers should be aware that in Arizona, adults can be arrested for drunk driving even if their Blood Alcohol Content (BAC) is below .08, if they are impaired to the slightest degree by the amount they drank.
Over Memorial Day weekend, particularly at family outings, some parents may let their older teenagers drink. While some states allow those under 21 to have a BAC of .01 or .02, Arizona has a zero tolerance policy for drunk drivers under the age of 21. Those under 21 may not even have even a BAC of .01%. A relatively recent case looked at the issue of blood tests for BAC for juvenile drivers, and the facts of the case are worth considering if you are a teenager or a parent.
In that case, a monitor at a seventeen-year-old defendant's school smelled marijuana on his clothing in 2012. The monitor searched the vehicle the defendant and his friends had driven to school and found drug paraphernalia. School officials reported this to the police and the sheriff arrived and advised the defendant of his Miranda rights. Nonetheless the defendant admitted that he and his friends had smoked marijuana away from campus and driven back.
The defendant was arrested and charged with drunk driving. The sheriff read him admonitions related to the implied consent law for blood tests and the defendant agreed to submit to testing. His parents were called and came to the school. Meanwhile, the defendant's blood was tested without his parent's consent. His parents were told he was caught smoking marijuana and arrested, but weren't asked for permission to test the blood that had been drawn.
Before a delinquency hearing, the defendant moved to suppress the blood test results. He argued that, as a minor, he lacked the legal ability to consent to testing. The juvenile court granted his motion, reasoning that the Arizona Parents' Bill of Rights includes the right to consent before a minor's blood is tested, notwithstanding Arizona's implied consent law. It also found that the defendant's consent hadn't been voluntary.
The State appealed the juvenile court's decision. The State argued that the Parents' Bill of Rights was inapplicable because the parental right to consent did not prevent law enforcement officers from acting in their official capacities within the scope of their authority.
The appellate court reasoned that anybody who operates a motor vehicle in Arizona, including minors, gives consent to alcohol testing of blood, breath and urine in the context of a DUI allegation. Although someone cannot be blood tested in a DUI stop without a warrant, drivers are already assumed to have given consent. They can withdraw the consent that has been given, but they face penalties for doing so.
↧
In North Carolina's "Right to Counsel" Bill, Far Less Than Meets the Eye
The “Dear Colleague” letter (about which I’ve frequently written over at MTC) featured a three-pronged assault on the due process rights of college students accused of sexual assault. First, it ordered colleges to adjudicate such matters through a “preponderance of evidence” (50.01%) standard, thereby dramatically increasing the likelihood that innocent students will be branded rapists by their schools. Second, it forced colleges to institute a double jeopardy scheme that allows accusers to appeal not-guilty findings even under the reduced threshold. Finally, it strongly encouraged colleges to deny accused students the right to cross-examine their accusers—even though in claims of acquaintance rape, the accuser might be the only witness against the accused.As hostile to due process as the “Dear Colleague” scheme is, however, the document at the very least didn’t explicitly deny the right of accused students to be represented by counsel in disciplinary proceedings. A cynic might say the letter didn’t have to issue such a mandate, since most colleges already bar lawyers from their disciplinary processes.This oversight, however, provides an opening (at least at public universities) for state legislatures to restore some semblance of due process for students accused of sexual misconduct. Nothing in the “Dear Colleague” letter prevents state legislatures from passing laws ordering public universities to let accused students have full, robust legal representation. And given the sudden, bipartisan interest in due process amidst the IRS and AP subpoena “scandals,” the political environment is unusually suitable for politicians to act.In April, seeking to safeguard student rights on campus, four North Carolina state representatives (Republicans John Bell and Jonathan Jordan, Democrats Rick Glazier and Nathan Baskerville,) served as lead sponsors for a measure called the Students & Administration Equality Act.The bill contained only one clause, entitled “Student disciplinary proceedings – student’s right to counsel,” and provided a much-needed reform on behalf of due process. It held that “any student enrolled at a constituent institution or student organization at a constituent institution that is accused of a violation of the disciplinary or conduct rules of the constituent institution and that wants legal representation may be represented by an attorney during any formal stage of any disciplinary procedure or other procedure adopted and used by the constituent institution regarding the charge of misconduct against the student or student organization.”The bill was referred to the House Education Committee, where it languished for a month. Last week, it was withdrawn from the committee and referred instead to the Rules Committee, which substantially rewrote the bill. Though still promising a “right to counsel for students and organizations” in disciplinary proceedings, the measure actually does no such thing.Here’s the new text, with the relevant sections gutting due process in bold:“Any student enrolled at a constituent institution who is accused of a violation of the disciplinary or conduct rules of the constituent institution shall have the right to be represented by a licensed attorney or non-attorney advocate who may fully participate during any disciplinary procedure or other procedure adopted and used by the constituent institution regarding the alleged violation. However, a student shall not have the right to be represented by a licensed attorney or non-attorney advocate in either of the following circumstances:(1) If the constituent institution has implemented a ‘Student Honor Court’ which is fully staffed by students to address such violations.(2) For any allegation of ‘academic dishonesty’ as defined by the constituent institution.”The amendments to the bill have so altered the original measure to render it meaningless.First, the bill no longer provides a “right to counsel,” at least as the word is commonly understood (an attorney). Instead, the bill requires colleges to allow students to be represented by an attorney orby a “non-attorney advocate.” In short, all the bill envisions is codifying the ways in which universities give a phony sense of due process by suggesting that an “advocate” (a faculty member, a fellow student, even a family member) can safeguard a student’s rights even if lawyers are excluded from the disciplinary proceedings. Despite the now-misleading title, no student facing charges before a college disciplinary tribunal in North Carolina will gain the “right to counsel” if the amended bill passes.Second, even the gutted “right to counsel” doesn’t apply if the school “has implemented a ‘Student Honor Court’ which is fully staffed by students to address such violations.” This provision, if construed broadly, would seem to exempt every disciplinary proceeding at a North Carolina public university except for one—the University of North Carolina’s recently-adopted sexual misconduct procedure, one of the earliest responses to the “Dear Colleague” letter. (UNC formally set up a two-tier system of campus justice in which students accused of sexual assault would both be judged by a lower standard than students accused of other offenses on campus, and would have their cases heard not by students but by a specially “trained” panel of . . . sensitive . . . administrators and students.) Even at UNC, however, the law wouldn’t require students accused of sexual misconduct to be represented by a lawyer, only by a “non-attorney advocate.” And that “right” already exists: an accused student receives an “advisor”to assist “with pre-hearing procedures and the presentation of witnesses and evidence at the hearing or at any subsequent proceedings. Only currently enrolled students or employed staff members of the University shall serve as advisors to the parties.” And that “advisor”—or “non-attorney advocate,” in the bill’s language—can’t do much once the hearing begins, since a student accused of sexual assault, or his “advisor,” “shall not have the right to question another party; however, each party may submit proposed questions to the panel for panel members to ask of the other party if the panel members determine, in their sole discretion, that the proposed questions are designed to elicit relevant information.”To review: the amended bill won’t provide any accused student in North Carolina a right to counsel; it won’t even apply to most disciplinary processes at North Carolina’s public colleges and universities; and it will have no effect on the one procedure (UNC’s new sexual assault standards) to which it clearly would apply.Last week, the North Carolina House of Representatives passed the bill by a margin of 112-1, with only Wake County Republican Jim Fulghumvoting no. The measure currently awaits action in the Senate.The upper chamber should reject the bill, and if the bill passes, Governor McCrory should veto it. Not only is the measure, as currently constituted, meaningless, a strong case could be made that the bill is harmful, because it creates the false impression that a “right to counsel” exists when, in fact, no such right is present.
↧
↧
Politico.com: Report: Obama admin. fought to keep Rosen warrant secret
Politico.com: Report: Obama admin. fought to keep Rosen warrant secret by Dylan Byers:
Yet another development today in the case of James Rosen, the Fox News reporter who was monitored by the Justice Dept. after receiving classified information from a State Department security adviser.
According to The New Yorker's Ryan Lizza, the Obama administration fought to keep the search warrant for Rosen’s private e-mail account secret on the grounds that they might need to monitor the account for a long period of time.
↧
D.Utah: No Franks hearing where no specific falsities mentioned
“The Court finds that Defendant has not met his burden and is not entitled to a Franks hearing. As an initial matter, Defendant does not point to specific portions of the affidavit that he claims to be false. However, Defendant does take issue with certain statements in the affidavit, which the Court will discuss.” United States v. Pentz, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72640 (D. Utah May 21, 2013).*
The officer here had plenty of reasonable suspicion that defendant was involved in drug dealing based on experience and a four-year snitch. He saw a hand labeled package at FedEx that strongly suggested to him based on experience that it contained drugs. United States v. Beverly, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72634 (W.D. Ky. April 15, 2013).*
Defendant was taken down in an illegal arrest, and then the gun on him was found. This is not a situation where there is a new crime before the arrest. There was no reasonable suspicion for the initial patdown. United States v. Evans, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72580 (E.D. Tenn. May 22, 2013),* R&R 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73293 (E.D. Tenn. April 8, 2013).*
The court finds credible the testimony of the officers that defendant consented to an entry and search of his apartment. United States v. Paulino, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71978 (S.D. N.Y. May 21, 2013).*
The body armor and gun in defendant’s car was lawfully seized because the stop was with probable cause defendant was speeding, driving on the wrong side of the road, running a red light, and evading an officer trying to stop him. United States v. Bogle, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 10377 (2d Cir. May 23, 2013).*
↧
Saturday Open Thread
It's Champion League Final Day!
Bayern Munich vs. Borussia Dortmund (or BVB for those in the know) in an all German club final.
I invested in Dortmund at the quarterfinal stage at 8-1, so a hedge is in order - Bayern (-1) at (+135) for 3...
[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
