A Kings Grand Larceny Lawyer said that, this is a motion to vacate a judgment dated February 4, 1959 convicting the defendant on his own plea of guilty to Attempted Grand Larceny in the Second Degree, upon an indictment charging...
//blawgsearch75.rssing.com/chan-6519914/article3721-live.html
↧
↧
Multiple charges are made against this defendant
On April 27, 1942, the defendant appearing with counsel pleaded not guilty to the following indictments: First count, robbery 1st degree; Second count, grant larceny 2nd degree; Third count, assault 2nd degree; Fourth count, robbery 1st degree; Fifth county, grand...
↧
Overpromising Universities May Lead to More False Claims Cases
Washington, D.C. whistleblower lawyer Tony Munter contributed this blog post.
More scrutiny for educational institutions is on the way.
↧
Friday Open Thread
Last workday before long weekend, it's hard to get everything done. I haven't had a chance to read today's news, so here's an open thread, all topics welcome.
My goal for the weekend: Finish watching Pablo Escobar, El Patron del...
[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]
↧
EL FISCAL PIERDE UN CASO DE ARMAS EN LA CORTE DE APELACIONES DE DALLAS
El 12 de agosto de 2013, la Corte de Apelaciones de Dallas anunció su decisión en un caso de apelación de la Corte Criminal Número Uno del Condado de Dallas, presidida por el juez Dan Patterson, un ex abogado defensor de Dallas. El acusado apeló con éxito después de haber sido declarado culpable por un jurado de llevar intencionalmente un arma, aunque no estaba en su propiedad.
El testimonio de los policías que investigaron sólo estableció que el acusado portaba un arma en la zona común del complejo de apartamentos donde vivía. Cuando se le preguntó por qué tenía un arma a la vista, el acusado dijo que realizaba la vigilancia del complejo de apartamentos, aunque no era un guardia de seguridad certificado por el estado. Fue arrestado.
El presidente del complejo de condominios testificó a favor del acusado. Confirmó que éste poseía una unidad en el complejo y también testificó que cada condomino poseía una participación indivisa en las áreas comunes de la propiedad, incluyendo el estacionamiento, el corredor y las pasarelas.
La Corte de Apelaciones analizó los elementos del crimen y determinó que la Fiscalía debió probar que el acusado no estaba en su propiedad. La Corte también descubrió que la fiscalía había presentado pruebas insuficientes para demostrarlo durante el juicio. Debido a que un acusado debe ser encontrado culpable de todos los elementos de un delito más allá de toda duda razonable, el Tribunal ordenó que el acusado fuera absuelto.
"Más allá de una duda razonable" es el nivel probatorio que la acusación sostiene en los juicios penales. En los juicios civiles, el nivel probatorio es menor. Un nivel que es más bajo que más allá de una duda razonable, incluso si el gobierno está tratando de quitarle los hijos de alguien; en esos casos debe ser sólo "clara y convincente".
↧
↧
The Hill: Google, Microsoft prepare for showdown over NSA spying
The Hill: Google, Microsoft prepare for showdown over NSA spying by Brendan Sasso:
[...] Read more!
↧
D.N.J.: Social workers' inspection entry governed by Fourth Amendment; Wyman distinguished
Social service workers’ entry for inspection into plaintiffs’ home was governed by the Fourth Amendment and could not be justified by Wyman v. James. Bostrom v. N.J. Div. of Youth & Family Servs., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121445 (D. N.J. August 26, 2013):
[...] Read more!
↧
Top Ten Reasons Texas Should Legalize Pot
Eric Holder has given a tentative green light for State recreational marijuana programs to go forward. Given how the last medical marijuana memo has been largely ignored, I'm still a little pessimistic the DOJ will really leave these States alone. Regardless, here are ten reasons Texas should take this opportunity to reform our State's marijuana laws. As a reminder, possession of any usable amount of marihuana is a 180-days-in-county-jail misdemeanor in Texas. I know, we are insane.
1. Willie Nelson. Are we really going to keep arresting Willie? Really? What kind of asshole arrests Willie Nelson for pot. If this was my only reason, it would be enough.
2. It's safer than booze. Texans drink a lot. Booze kills people. Weed can't kill you.
3. Limited Government. Freedom. Personal Responsibility. Every GOP candidate runs on these issues. Government isn't limited if we are trying to arrest every single person for the crime of having some dried up plant material in their pocket. Freedom means the freedom to make adult choices without fear of arrest. And persons can be very responsible while stoned. Especially if you have a Lord of the Rings Trilogy for them to watch.
4. Young Adults. Young adults are shitty criminals and we catch too many of them in our misguided pot war. They confess that they have pot in their pocket, consent to searches etc. They are a very honest and trusting group, which will get you arrested in Texas. Sometimes the cool police officers will let them go, but too often we throw college kids in jail with real criminals and put them on probation. Could you have handled probation at 19? Drug tests, reporting monthly, thousands in fees and fines? Worse, we give too many young adults a lifetime criminal record, a "drug conviction" that ruins their future. I've seen this first hand and it's an incredibly shitty thing to do.
5. People are going to move to Colorado. I tell a lot of my cannabis clients to move to Colorado because they have legalized recreational and medicinal marijuana. Colorado already has better weather than Texas, beautiful mountains, and no Greg Abbott.
Do we really need to give Texans another reason to bail on the oppressive heat and oppressive political regime here? Guess what, I've had a lot of "normal" marijuana clients come through my office. The kind of people you want living, working, and paying taxes here. The fact we threaten every joint owner in the State with 6 months in jail is a strong incentive for them to consider other states.
6. Marijuana is medicine. The debate is over. Adults need it, children need it, people need it. Get over it. Fun fact- The Federal Government has a patent on medical pot, and the federal government has sent this guy over 130,000 joints for him to use as medicine.
Would you arrest these parents? In Texas, we would. Which brings me to my next point.
7. CPS is insane about marijuana. CPS goons will kidnap children and throw them into foster care if they find out the parents smoke weed. These people are nuts, and the law gives them near unlimited authority to take your children if you use cannabis.
8. Opportunity Costs- Weed cases are a make work project for the criminal justice system. They provide zero public safety benefit. We waste millions in tax dollars, arresting, trying, and incarcerating pot smokers. At the same time we let real crime, that is, crime with victims, go unsolved. Instead of clogging the system with junk cases, we could free officers to investigate real crime.
9. What do George W., Barack Obama, and Bill Clinton have in common? That's right, they loved the ganja and they didn't get caught. We can't even elect a President who hasn't gotten high. That's how you know a crime isn't a real crime, when Presidential candidates can admit to it with impunity. Think if all 3 had admitted to theft, or assault? See, those are real crimes.
10. It's inevitable. I'm tired of Texas being bassackwards when it comes to freedom. Why do we have to be last when it comes to legalizing adult behaviors. We still can't gamble in Texas. Think about it, throwing dice on a table is too much freedom for our pols. We still have dry freaking counties. It's embarrassing how much government we have in our lives. Cannabis reform would make us look less insane to the rest of the world. This isn't Saudi Arabia or China, we are supposed to be free here. Why do we have to be last to embrace common sense reforms?
Finally, I'll leave you with this- Weed is legal in North Korea, but not in Texas. North Fucking Korea.
↧
Considering Drunk Driving Charges Based on Breath Samples vs. Blood Samples
When looking at the process of charging a motorist with operating a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, establishing proof of intoxication is a primary concern for the arresting officer as well as the local prosecutor who will eventually try the DWI case. There is no question of whether or not driving while intoxicated is a serious offense; it certainly carries severe penalties entailing stiff monetary fines as well as suspension of one's driver's license and potential jail time.
As New Jersey DWI-DUI defense attorneys, I and my colleagues know that just because a driver is stopped and charged with a drunken driving offense, it does not necessarily mean that there is no recourse for that individual. The law provides everyone an opportunity to defend himself in a court of law, and lawyers such as those at my firm are ready to represent people accused of DWI or drug DUI against accusations of impaired motor vehicle operation.
Currently, the state of New Jersey typically uses the Alcotest 7110 breath testing device, which has been ruled a legitimate piece of equipment for determining the blood-alcohol content (BAC) of a suspect via a breath sample. Manufactured by Draeger Industries and initially put into service in 2003, the Alcotest machine conducts two separate internal BAC tests; one that uses infrared radiation and another that employs and electrochemical process.
↧
↧
State clears corrections officers in the death of Clay County inmate
Prosecutors have decided not to seek criminal charges against Clay County corrections officers who watched a 19-year-old inmate die in a restraint chair earlier this year. The death of Daniel Linsinbigler Jr. was ruled a homicide, but no charges will be filed in this Clay County Homicide Case, according to a report in the Florida Times-Union. Linsinbigler was in the medical unit of the jail and taken from his cell after officers said he was acting belligerent - kicking his cell door and yelling, the newspaper reported. Linsinbigler was on suicide watch at the jail 10 days after his arrest on an indecent exposure charge and was likely days or weeks from being released before his death, the newspaper reported.
Three inmates told investigators from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement they heard Linsinbigler crying out that he could not breathe, the newspaper reported. But none of the corrections officers or medical personnel mentioned that fact in the 62-page report, the newspaper reported. Linsinbigler died of asphyxiation, the newspaper reported. Prosecutors have ruled the death accidental and unintended in this Clay County Homicide Case, the newspaper reported. The lack of charges is fairly common in case involving an inmate death, much like when people are killed in police-involved shootings. Any penalty or punishment for the police or sheriff's office likely comes in the form of a civil lawsuit filed by the family. The standard of proof in a civil case is not as difficult to meet, and many police departments will defer to the civil court system rather than have one of their own face criminal charges. Not to mention, if prosecutors file criminal charges, it certainly lends creditability to any civil claim in the case - opening up the sheriff's office to what could be more serious monetary damages.
The most likely criminal charge, if there were to have been one filed, would be manslaughter. Manslaughter is the charge the state applied when someone dies as a result of another person's negligence. For example, if two people are in a fight and one ends up dying, the state could file manslaughter charges. Intent is not an issue in a manslaughter case. The state would not have to prove that the corrections officers were trying to kill Linsinbigler, only that their negligence caused his death. The first step in any case that might include officers and criminal conduct is the criminal investigation - which is now complete. The next step is an internal review that could include changes in policy or potential discipline for the officers involved. While there still are punitive options against the officers in this Clay County Homicide Case, the most serious are clearly the criminal charges - which have now been eliminated.
If you or a loved one needs a criminal defense attorney in Jacksonville or the surrounding area, call The Mussallem Law Firm at (904) 365-5200 for a FREE CONSULTATION. Our Clay County Homicide Attorney, Victoria "Tori" Mussallem, is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
↧
"Consensual" Police Encounters Often Anything But, Report Says
It's been more than four decades since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that police must have some reasonable, articulable suspicion that a person is committing, has committed or is about to commit a crime in order to briefly detain and search that person.
However, D.C. criminal defense attorneys recognize that the one major loophole in the law is something called a "consensual encounter." That is, if an officer doesn't have reasonable suspicion upon which to stop you, there is nothing stopping that officer from asking you to "voluntarily" engage in a conversation.
But there is a fine line between voluntary and involuntary where officers are concerned, and a new study published in the Florida Coastal Law Review indicates that "consensual police encounters" are almost always less consensual than they may appear on the surface.
↧
R.I.P. Harris County DA Mike Anderson
Harris County DA Mike Anderson passed away this morning in hospice care, the Houston Chronicle reported. "Anderson, who announced in May that he had cancer, died Saturday from the illness." Condolences to his family and friends. Murray Newman offered personal remembrances; Kuff explains why he voted for Anderson in the 2012 general election.
↧
The power, control, domination and coercion exercised in abusive relationships can be expressed in terms of violence
In a custody and visitation proceeding, the father appeals from an order of the County Family Court which awarded sole custody of the subject children to the mother and only awarded him visitation from Monday at 6 P.M. to Wednesday at 6 P.M. on alternate weeks, with additional visitation upon agreement of the parties.
An award of custody must be based upon the best interests of the child, and there is no prima facie right to the custody of the child in either parent. In considering questions of custody, the court must make every effort to determine what is in the best interest of the child, and what will promote the child's welfare and happiness. The best interests of the child are determined by a review of the totality of the circumstances.
Factors to be considered include the quality of the home environment and parental guidance, the ability of each parent to provide for the child's emotional and intellectual development, and the financial status and ability of each parent to provide for the child. The relative fitness of each parent, as well as the effect an award of custody to one parent might have on the child's relationship with the other parent should be considered. In addition, consideration should be given to any prior award or agreement as to custody. While not determinative, the court should consider the child's expressed preference as an indication of what is in the child's best interest. Additionally, if criminal domestic violence is alleged, the court must consider the effects of such violence upon the child.
Since weighing the factors relevant to any custody determination requires an evaluation of the testimony and the sincerity of the parties involved, such an evaluation is best made by the trial court. Thus, a trial court's determination regarding an award of custody should not be disturbed unless it lacks a sound and substantial basis in the record.
Here, the trial court, after having had the opportunity to evaluate the testimony, consider the recommendations of a forensic expert, interview the children in camera, and consider the position of the attorney for the child, determined that the children's best interests would be served by an order awarding sole custody of the children to the mother and visitation to the father from Monday at 6 P.M. to Wednesday at 6 P.M. on alternate weeks. That determination is supported by the record, and should not be disturbed on appeal.
In this domestic violence prosecution, the defendant stands indicted for, among other things, burglary, assault and criminal contempt involving alleged assaults on his girlfriend at her home in violation of an order of protection.
It is alleged that the complainant has had a change of heart and is refusing to cooperate with the prosecution as a result of over 300 telephone calls placed to her by the defendant from jail. Because of this the People move to introduce the complainant's grand jury testimony on their direct case. A Sirois hearing was held in order to determine whether such an order is warranted.
The Constitution guarantees to every citizen accused of crimes, the right to confront the witnesses against him, which of necessity, includes the right to cross-examination. In fact, cross-examination has been described as the principal means by which the believability of a witness and the truth of his testimony are tested, and that restrictions on the right to cross-examine "can deprive a defendant of an important means of combating inculpatory testimony or at least demonstrating the existence of reasonable doubt as to guilt.
Nevertheless, the law recognizes that when an accused procures the silence of a witness against him, he should not be permitted to gain from his wrong. Thus, if other competent testimony of the witness exists, it may be used to balance the wrongful action of the defendant who forfeits his right by his own conduct.
In this case the defense argues that the recorded conversations contain no threats of harm or efforts at intimidation sufficient to prove defendant's intent to silence the witness. Although that is certainly the tenor of the calls, it is not only outright threats that can demonstrate the intent to stay a witness' cooperation, but persuasion and control by a defendant.
The power, control, domination and coercion exercised in abusive relationships can be expressed in terms of violence certainly, but just as real in repeated calls sounding expressions of love and concern. Orders of Protection are therefore issued by courts as much to prevent assaults on the psyche of a vulnerable victim as to prevent assaults on her person.
The court has been shown, by clear and convincing evidence that the wrongdoing of the defendant has caused the victim to stop cooperating with the prosecution. Thus, in the event she fails to testify at trial, or her trial testimony is contrary to her grand jury testimony, the People shall be permitted to use the grand jury minutes as evidence on their direct case.
↧
↧
Lamar Odom's DUI arrest raises issues of reliability of field sobriety tests
Lamar Odom was arrested for DUI in California. According to a CNN news report, he failed field sobriety tests, which typically includes a one leg stand test and nine step walk and turn field sobriety test. As a Massachusetts...
↧
WA - Benton County sex offenders' privacy rights upheld
Donna Zink
Original Article
08/30/2013
By Tyler Richardson
A Benton County judge ruled in favor of a small group of low-level sex offenders Friday, putting the public release of their personal information on hold for the time being.
However, the ruling doesn't protect more than 400 other offenders who are not represented by attorneys, said Deputy Prosecutor Ryan Lukson. The county plans on releasing their information Sept. 6, unless the offenders are granted an injunction.
The...
[[ This is a content summary only. Visit our blog for full links, videos, studies and more! ]]
↧
Dade County Man Speaks Out After Molestation Charge Dropped
↧
Robert King Purser, Palm Beach County, Florida Highway Patrol Lieutenant, Arrested for Theft
Robert King Purser, a Palm Beach County, Florida Highway Patrol lieutenant and side business owner, was arrested Wednesday for allegedly defrauding a local company out of over $200,000 using his business, news sources report. Purser, 50, was booked into the Palm Beach County Jail on three counts of grand theft over $20,000. He was later released after posting $15,000 bond. Reports did not say whether Purser had obtained an defense attorney.
According to reports, Purser began working for the Florida Highway Patrol on January 8, 1990. During his time with the FHP, Purser reportedly had 19 complaints filed against him, but only ten ended with disciplinary action; he was exonerated in six cases, and the others were too insubstantial to merit further action. In one case from 2006, Purser was reportedly disciplined after he "[created] an apparent or real conflict of interest while coordinating" off-duty work. Following this latest alleged scheme, the FHP decided to release Purser from their ranks. "We hold our troopers to a high standard of integrity and trust," an FHP spokesperson reportedly said.
Reports say Purser, in addition to working as an FHP lieutenant, owned and operated 208 Enterprises of South Florida Inc. The business provided troopers with second jobs by sending them to businesses to work as security. According to the FHP guidelines, officers are allowed to have side jobs so long as they do not break the law or slight the FHP office in any way. In 2010, 2011, and 2012, Purser filed the compulsory files with FHP to use off-duty officers through his company, for which he received approval, sources say.
↧
↧
Roberto Paul of Fort Lauderdale, Florida Arrested for Child Abuse
Roberto Paul of Fort Lauderdale, Florida was arrested Tuesday after he allegedly disciplined his seven-year-old daughter by holding her hand over a stove, news sources report. Paul, 31, was booked into the Broward County Main Jail on charges of resisting arrest with violence and aggravated child abuse. A judge ordered that he be held in lieu of a $100,500 bail bond. It was not immediately clear whether Paul had hired a criminal defense lawyer.
According to reports, Paul has at least two daughters. It was unclear whether the children have another guardian other than Paul, who lives in Fort Lauderdale. Paul does not appear to have faced abuse allegations in the past. It is not clear who is caring for the girls while Paul is incarcerated.
The problems started when the seven-year-old wore her sister's shirt without permission, sources say. Paul reportedly punished the girl by burning her hand. "[Paul] took [the victim's] left hand, held it to a hot stove coil and permanently disfigured the child's hand by burning the child's hand," a Broward county judge reportedly recounted during Paul's court appearance. "The child struggled to be released from [Paul's] grip." The judge reportedly said Paul was accused of "maliciously punishing the child and knowingly causing permanent disfigurement to the child."
↧
Obama Asks Congress for Syria Strike Approval
President Obama today said he has asked Congress to vote on launching a strike on Syria when it returns Sept. 9. John Boehner says the vote will be the week of September 9.
Obama said he believes he has the authority to act without congressional...
[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]
↧
Mountain Home Rejects Six Juvenile Sex Offenders From Public Schools
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
