There are those who argue that California’s bar examination — the exam that one has to take and pass in order to be eligible to be an attorney — is one of the toughest in the nation. Aside from taking that exam, and seeing for yourself that the claims of its difficulty are more than […]
Reading Comprehension & Law
↧
↧
UK - Sex offence suspects should remain anonymous, say MSN readers
Original Article
That is a no-brainer, but it should be for everyone who has been accused of a crime. I'm sure everybody knows, just because an accusation is made and someone is arrested, doesn't mean they are guilty, and their name shouldn't be drug through the mud on shows like Nancy Disgrace, etc.
09/11/2013
By Stephen Jones
People charged with sex offences should remain anonymous until a court finds them guilty, according to a poll of MSN readers.
The finding comes after the...
[[ This is a content summary only. Visit our blog for full links, videos, studies and more! ]]
↧
When jurors don't hear all the testimony
Judiciary Law § 510 provides that to be qualified as a juror a person must: (1) be a citizen of the United States, and a resident of the county, (2) be not less than eighteen years of age, (3) not have been convicted of a felony, and (4) be able to understand and communicate in the English language. Under this section, a hearing impaired juror may sit, but only if he or she “is capable of doing what jurors are supposed to do,” including hearing and evaluating the testimony through lip-reading, use of assistive devices, or other means (People v Guay, 72 AD3d 1201, 1202 [3rd Dept 2010], citing People v Guzman, 76 NY2d 1, 5 [1990]; see CPL § 270.20 [1][a]; Judiciary Law § 510).In Guay, the Third Department affirmed defendant’s conviction after the trial court dismissed a prospective hearing-impaired juror over defense objection, who the court determined would likely be unable to hear the testimony. Affirming the Third Department’s holding, the Court of Appeals held that “this case is not akin to Guzman where the prospective juror confirmed that a sign language interpreter would allow him to follow the proceedings verbatim,” since in Guay, no alternative accommodations were requested or discussed (People v Guay, 18 NY3d 16, 23 [2011]).Along these lines, the Fourth Department noted that “[i]t is well established that ‘[a] juror who has not heard all the evidence is grossly unqualified to render a verdict’ ” (People v Jean-Philippe, 101 AD3d 1582 [4th Dept 2012], citing People v Hymes, 70 AD3d 1371, 1372 [4th Dept 2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 774 [2010] and People v Williams, 202 AD2d 1004 [4th Dept 1994]).In Jean-Philippe, the trial court made a valiant but unsuccessful attempt to save the conviction when it quizzed a sleeping juror about whether she “missed any relevant or important . . . parts . . . of the testimony” and “heard everything that [she] need[ed] to know thus far” (while she was sleeping?). The Fourth Department noted that “because there were no alternate jurors at the time, the dismissal of a juror would have required a mistrial” however “it was incumbent upon the court to dismiss that juror, even though that dismissal would have necessitated a mistrial.” Even though it was really, really hard. Even though it meant starting all over. Even though the temptation to press on as if things were OK must have been overwhelming.A juror who cannot hear the testimony is unable to understand the testimony and is therefore incapable of “doing what jurors are supposed to do.” Such a juror is unqualified to serve under Judiciary Law § 510 and must be excused. In an interesting aside, defense counsel is not held to this same lofty standard. Not until counsel has been “repeatedly unconscious through not insubstantial portions” of even capital murder trials will prejudice to the defendant will be presumed (see, Muniz v Smith, 647 F3d 619 [6th Cir 2011]; Burdine v Johnson, 262 F3d 336, 340-41 [5th Cir 2001]; Tippins v Walker, 77 F3d 682, 685 [2nd Cir 1996]). But one juror taking a little cat nap (it’s warm in those courtrooms, had a big lunch, counsel drones on, 11 others to pick up the slack, what’s the big deal?) requires reversal? Doesn’t seem right.
↧
How Often Do Lawyers Contact Their Clients?
If you have recently been charged with a criminal offense in California and this is your first time dealing with the criminal justice system you are likely scared, confused, worried, and possibly frustrated. These are all perfectly normal responses to been charged with a crime. Since this likely means that ...The post How Often Do Lawyers Contact Their Clients? appeared first on Law Office of Domenic J. Lombardo.
↧
VT - ‘Sexting’ phenomenon raises questions for schools, parents
Original Article
09/11/2013
By Neal P. Goswami
BARRE - Administrators at Harwood Union High School in South Duxbury plan to spend time over the school year engaging students and parents in public discourse on the dangers of illegally exchanging explicit photos.
The effort was prompted by a long-term “sexting” ring uncovered last year at Harwood Union High School. According to an op-ed piece written by Washington West Supervisory Union Superintendent Brigid Scheffert and published...
[[ This is a content summary only. Visit our blog for full links, videos, studies and more! ]]
↧
↧
Unpaid traffic tickets and warrants in Colorado are a recipe for disaster.
An article in the Denver Post by Mike Klis and Ryan Parker reports that Denver Broncos player Von Miller has an unpaid traffic ticket and warrant out of California:
"Denver Broncos star linebacker Von Miller has an open warrant for his arrest in California. Susan Schroeder, spokeswoman for the Orange County District Attorney's Office confirmed to The Denver Post that Miller has a warrant for failure to appear on a traffic ticket issued last year. It is unclear what effect this will have if Miller travels to California when the team plays either the Raiders or Chargers, as Schroeder said the warrant pertains to the entire state."
In Colorado, most traffic warrants are statewide. When a person fails to appear for a traffic ticket in Colorado, the judge will typically issue a bench warrant for the person's arrest. Thereafter, the Court will send a notice in the form of an Outstanding Judgment Warrant (OJW) to the Colorado Department of Revenue Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV). Once the DMV received notice of the OJW, they will send a firm letter (some might call it "nasty") to the driver informing them that they have a few days to clear up the OJW before their license is suspended.
If the driver does not act within the set time period (typically 30 days), his driver's license will be suspended. Thereafter, if the person drives and is stopped, he will likely be charged with driving under suspension which could lead to jail time, fines, and possible the further suspension of the person's driver's license for an additional year. Thus, it is critical to clear up any OJWs on a driver's record immediately.
Out of state warrants, like the warrant in the Von Miller case can lead to the suspension of a Colorado driver's license as well. Most states communicate with each other through the interstate compact and will put a driver's privilege to drive on hold through the National Driver Registry. Thus, traffic warrants and tickets usually catch up with a person eventually whether they are in-state or out-of-state.
Multiple unpaid tickets and warrants cause even further trouble. In Colorado, if a person is convicted of three or more major offenses in a 7 year period, his license will be suspended for 5 years. Driving under suspension is a habitual traffic offender offense.
CBS 4 Denver, Brian Maass, reports that Von Miller has additional charges pending in Colorado for driving under suspension:
"Denver Broncos linebacker Von Miller, already suspended for the first six games of the season, now faces more legal problems according to a CBS4 investigation. CBS4 has learned the star linebacker was stopped again by law enforcement last week and cited for driving while his license was suspended and speeding, adding to a multitude of legal woes. Arapahoe County officials confirm that late last week an Arapahoe County deputy stopped Miller for speeding in the vicinity of his home in Arapahoe County. A routine computer check showed that Miller's license had already been suspended. Arapahoe County Sheriff Grayson Robinson told CBS4 that Miller was not jailed but was cited for the license violation and speeding. He said Miller was with his father, who was then allowed to drive the car."
Adding to Miller's woes appears to be a third case stemming from 2012 for failure to appear in Arapahoe County. The Denver Post, Mike Klis and Ryan Parker write: "When Miller was arrested by the Arapahoe County Sheriff's Department in August on a warrant for failing to appear in court stemming from traffic violations in October 2012, he didn't know about the warrant or court appearance. "That was on me," Miller told Denver reporters Aug. 20. "I've just got to be more responsible. It was a ticket from back in (October). I'm not making any excuses, like I said before. I've just got to grow up, be more mature and take care of business."
The best avenue for anyone who has one or more driving under suspension cases is to immediately stop driving and sort out the legal issues and driver's license reinstatement issues before getting behind the wheel. There are many approaches to these types of cases. Often times jail and further driver's license suspensions can be avoided with a very careful and meticulous handling of the cases. I've personally represented clients who have had upwards of 7 driving under suspension cases pending in various Colorado courts all at the same time with winning results. Although each case is unique, an experienced traffic attorney can make a world of difference in these cases.
↧
NLJ: Appeals Court Ponders Citizens' Right to Tape Traffic Stops
NLJ: Appeals Court Ponders Citizens' Right to Tape Traffic Stops by Sheri Qualters:
[...] Read more!
↧
TX - Registering sex offenders will not make children safer
Original Article
09/12/2013
By Sandy Rozek
I am writing in response to the article "Sex offenders in town down by more than 50 percent" by Paul Gnadt. (Editor's note: The article appeared on Page 7 of the Sept. 4 issue of the Burleson Star.)
While this fact is no doubt well received by parents and citizens in general, it is irresponsible journalism on your part to use it with no explanation as to what it does--and doesn't--accomplish.
What does it accomplish? 17 individuals, or...
[[ This is a content summary only. Visit our blog for full links, videos, studies and more! ]]
↧
MADD Teams Up with Sparks Courts for DUI Treatment
This month, Sparks Justice and Municipal Courts will start permitting MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) to present Victim Impact Panels to defendants convicted of the Nevada crime of drunk driving. Victim impact panels (VIPs) are comprised of victims, former offenders, first responders, and others sharing stories about how DUIs affected their lives. The purpose of VIPs is to educate attendees about the gravity of drunk driving and to deter them from committing a DUI again.
The Nevada crime of drunk driving occurs when someone operates a motor vehicle while impaired by alcohol or with a blood alcohol level (BAL) of .08 or above. Note that a person may be convicted of DUI in Nevada merely by having a key in the ignition in the car even if the car is not running. Typical defenses to DUI is that the breath/blood testing equipment was faulty, or that the defendant had a medical condition that caused a false breath/blood test result.
↧
↧
Two Words That Must Be Spoken At A Sentencing Hearing
I have been a little remiss posting this summer. I have had a full plate with my term as President of the Tennessee Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers , a class at The Trial Lawyers College , as well as practicing law. So, back to the blog. Before I share with you the two most important words that must be said at a sentencing hearing , a brief explanation of what a sentencing hearing is in order.
Most plea bargains in Tennessee have a agreed upon sentence as to length and whether one should get probation or not. In cases in which the jury decides guilt , the judge always decides punishment except in capital cases and where a fine is set by the jury. In some cases , both sides can agree to the issue of guilt but can't agree to the punishment. Then , the parties agree to a sentencing hearing. At the sentencing hearing , the defendant and the government can present evidence and call witnesses to support their position.There is statutory guidelines which the court must follow to determine whether a defendant should go to jail or serve their sentence on probation. if their are multiple convictions , the court must also determine if the sentences are consecutive or concurrent.
What are the two words that must be said at every sentencing hearing ? I "m sorry. A defendant does not has to testify but can make a allocution . A defendant asking the court to be placed on probation needs to say I'm sorry and show some remorse for their actions. Personal responsibility goes a long way with most judges. If you plead guilty to some crime whether a domestic violence charge to a more serious charge like robbery. One must accept their actions and say your sorry.
↧
DUI Pinellas Lawyer Call Attorney 1-877-793-9290
http://duipinellascounty.com/
DUI Pinellas Attorney Lawyer
Stop Worrying. The Call is Free, the Relief can be valuable. 1-877-793-9290 .
↧
Florida Criminal Defense Attorney :: Two Florida Residents Accused of Hiding Crack Pipes in Their Bodies
Two Floridians were caught hiding crack pipes in their bodies last month after police arrested a man and woman in two separate incidents, according to authorities with the St. Lucie County Sheriff's Office and the Indian River County Sheriff's Office.
On Aug. 16, a 46-year-old man was arrested after he allegedly swallowed a crack pipe. Fort Pierce police claim jail X-rays confirm the allegations. The man had previously been arrested for possession of crack cocaine on Aug. 1.
Authorities claim that when they confronted the man, he attempted to throw something under a car and then tried hiding something underneath his hat. Police confiscated what was in his hat, which according to the arrest report, tested positive for crack cocaine.
The man was arrested and taken to the St. Lucie County jail. He apparently told authorities he was not hiding any illicit drugs on his person.
However, the police report states that an X-ray showed a crack pipe lodged in the man's stomach horizontally. The man was taken to the hospital to have the pipe removed.
It is unknown at this time whether or not the man has enlisted the help of an attorney. It should be noted that prosecutors in St. Lucie County take drug charges quite seriously. It is a crime to be in possession of any illegal controlled substances such as cocaine, marijuana, LSD, heroin and methamphetamine. Drug possession laws vary based upon the type of drug and the amount found on the person. Being found in possession of small amounts of a drug may result in "simple" possession charges, whereas being found in possession of large quantities can lead to charges related to drugs sales and distribution.
If you or someone you care for has been arrested on drug charges in Fort Pierce, Port St. Lucie, the Village of St. Lucie or the surrounding area, a St. Lucie County Criminal Defense Attorney at Whittel & Melton can possibly help you avoid a conviction. For a free consultation, contact us today online or call 561-367-8777 to discuss your charges.
In a separate incident on Aug. 14, jail officials conducting a strip search of a Vero Beach woman apparently found a cocaine pipe hidden in the woman's vagina, according to the Indian River County Sheriff's Office.
The 30-year-old was arrested after officers responded to a trespassing complaint at a local Walgreens.
She allegedly told officers she did not have any drugs on her person, but authorities
claim the strip search showed otherwise.
It is not immediately clear if the woman has an attorney. However, it is important to note that Florida drug possession laws also prohibit possessing drug paraphernalia such as crack pipes, syringes and even bongs. This crime can be charged on its own, but usually accompanies other drug possession or drug sale charges. Drug paraphernalia is classified as anything that can be used to help inject, ingest or inhale an illegal drug into the body. In Florida, possession of drug paraphernalia is a first-degree misdemeanor. Even though this crime is not a felony offense, it still carries very serious ramifications, including up to one year in jail and a fine up to $1,000. Additionally, the stigma attached to a conviction of this nature can follow you around for the rest of your life making it difficult to find suitable employment and housing.
If you have been charged with a drug crime in Vero Beach, Sebastian, Fellsmere, Indian River Shores or the surrounding areas, an Indian River County Criminal Defense Lawyer at Whittel & Melton can help. Contact us today online or call 561-367-8777 to schedule a meeting for a free case evaluation.
↧
Science News - September 12, 2013
The new chief medical examiner in Los Angeles will oversee major changes to the department; the National Institute of Standards and Technology is working on updating a mobile guide; and researchers from the United States have developed methods for detecting sarin gas. Here is the round up of news for the week: Dr. Mark Fajardo was recently sworn in as the new chief medical examiner of Los Angeles County's Department of Medical Examiner-Coroner. He will oversee a $24-million lab renovation that will include new equipment and expanded space to perform autopsies. He will also implement management changes to ensure that the department can better keep pace with the 5,700 autopsies that it performs annually. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is revising its mobile forensics guide due to the rapid increase of mobile technology. In order to help forensic investigators quickly process evidence from a wide variety of technology, the newly revised guide, Special Publication 800-101 Revision 1: Guidelines on Mobile Device Forensics, will include a triage decision tree that provides a "starting point to align investigations with existing policies and procedures, such as determining if circumstances exist to extract data onsite or transport the device to a laboratory." During the past several years, researchers from the United States have been working on methods to confirm the presence of the deadly nerve agent sarin in order to be prepared in the case of chemical attacks. Current techniques use standard chemistry and forensic instrumentation such as gas chromatography and mass spectrometry to identify sarin and to possibly determine its source. The New Mexico Court of Appeals upheld a large fine against the University of New Mexico for its actions to intimidate a forensic pathologist, forcing him to withdraw as an expert witness in a medical malpractice case against the university. The Pathology Blawg reports that while the university was exerting pressure, the Office of the Medical Investigator for the state supported the forensic pathologist and his consultation on the case. In a recent US News & Report article highlighting popular college majors that lead to jobs in growing fields, biometrics and forensic science rank second and third, respectively. Both these industries are expected to grow significantly over the next decade due to the increasing desire to solve crimes with forensic evidence.
↧
↧
Theatre, it and its theatre manager were charged with criminal information violating the obscenity statute Penal Law
On January 22, 1971, while the Petitioner Amusement Corporation was the operator of a Theatre, it and its theatre manager were charged with criminal information violating the obscenity statute Penal Law. The basis of the charges was the showing of two allegedly obscene sex motion pictures and two allegedly obscene advertising trailers.
Pursuant to an order to show cause, a hearing was held at Criminal Term of the District Court on the issues as to whether an adversary hearing should be conducted to determine whether the films and trailers are obscene, and whether a warrant should be issued for their seizure. The Court ordered that such a hearing be held and it was thereafter adjourned.
In the interim the instant Article 78 proceeding, in the nature of prohibition, was commenced, the basis of which is the Petitioner Amusement Corporation’s contention that the District Court lacks jurisdiction to conduct an adversary hearing.
The adversary hearing is a relatively new concept in the court’s jurisprudence, arising out of the United States Supreme Court's growing concern within the last decade for protection of the rights afforded under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.
In a case involving the petitioner herein, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that the adversary hearing requirement prescribed was applicable to the seizure of motion picture films as well as books, theorizing that by reason of the size of its prospective audience, the seizure of a film would be analogous to a mass seizure of sex books as was involved in another related case.
It appears that if the District Court or any court of comparable criminal jurisdiction is to fulfill its function, it must be afforded the means to do so. Clearly, it has the power to issue search warrants upon a showing of probable cause and, were it not for the United States Supreme Court's concern for the protection of First Amendment rights, the ordinary Fourth Amendment safeguards would apply to the seizure of indecent obscene material in the same manner as to the seizure of other types of child contraband.
There has been no showing that adequate protection of the Petitioner Amusement Corporation's constitutional rights would not be afforded in an adversary hearing in the District Court and, in the absence of such a showing, the requirement that such hearings be conducted in the Supreme Court would serve no purpose other than the emasculation of the District Court's authority and the delay of justice. An adversary hearing, since it is a requirement, must be considered an integral part of the criminal prosecution to which it relates, and in the Court's view the District Court's inherent powers are sufficiently broad to authorize its holding of an adversary hearing under Section 794 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Furthermore, to preclude the District Court of Nassau County or any comparable criminal court from holding an adversary hearing and to insist that such a hearing be held in accordance with Section 22--a, is to misunderstand and misconstrue the purpose and nature of the adversary hearing contemplated by the United States Supreme Court requirements. The purpose of the adversary hearing is only to determine whether there exists a legitimate case that the material is obscene. It is not the purpose of such a hearing to reach a final adjudication of the question on the merits, as is contemplated by an injunction proceeding brought pursuant to the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Accordingly, the within petition for an order to prohibit the Judges of the District Court of Nassau County from proceeding with an adversary hearing to determine whether the films and the advertising trailers are obscene is hereby denied and the petition dismissed.
↧
Judicial Conference writes to Prez Obama about crisis in funding court operations
As reported via this Politico story, headlined "Judiciary sends Obama budget plea," the Judicial Conference of the United States has written directly to Prez Obama to lament the impact of sequestration and budget cuts. The letter to the Prez is...
↧
AL - ACLU files suit against Etowah County Sheriff over registered sex offender house searches
Original Article
09/12/2013
By William Thornton
GADSDEN - The American Civil Liberties Union has filed a lawsuit against Etowah County Sheriff Todd Entrekin and two officers in the department over what they say are "unannounced, random, and suspicionless" searches of the home of a registered sex offender.
The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, does not name the three family members. They are identified in the suit as John, Jane and James Doe....
[[ This is a content summary only. Visit our blog for full links, videos, studies and more! ]]
↧
On 23 November 2003 the court issued an order granting the petition
This is a proceeding wherein the petitioner seeks leave pursuant to article 6 of the Civil Rights Law to change her surname to that of her same-sex life partner. Her partner has consented to the application before a notary public....
↧
↧
The charges arose from an alleged scheme that defrauded the New York State
The defendant doctor was indicted for grand larceny in the second degree and conspiracy in the first degree. A man was also indicted and is a fugitive. The charges arose from an alleged scheme that defrauded the New York State...
↧
CPL 710.30 - Observations about observations
By Jill PapernoSecond Assistant Monroe County Public DefenderCPL § 710.30 requires the prosecutor to provide notice to the defense within a statutory period when the prosecutor intends to offer a witness who has previously engaged in a police arranged identification procedure, when the witness will be testifying to…what?We know that if the identification procedure was not confirmatory, the identifying witness cannot engage in an in-court identification of the defendant if there has been a previous out-of-court identification procedure. Or if the procedure was suggestive and there was no independent basis. But can a witness come in, describe events, describe the appearance of the person they observed, and not identify, if there has been no § 710.30 notice or Wade hearing?Since this happened in a recent case, prosecutors may be seeking to skirt the § 710.30 rules in future cases and I wanted to offer some suggested responses.CPL § 710.30 states that:Whenever the people intend to offer at a trial…(b) testimony regarding an observation of the defendant either at the time or place of the commission of the offense or upon some other occasion relevant to the case, to be given by a witness who has previously identified him as such, they must serve upon the defendant a notice of such intention, specifying the evidence intended to be offered. [emphasis added]The statute does not state that the notice is only required if there is going to be an in-court identification. So if a witness comes in and describes someone engaging in conduct, and describes the appearance of that person who apparently shares physical characteristics with your client, but doesn’t identify your client, that is still testimony that requires a prior 710.30 notice? If the testimony was not an observation of the defendant, then it wouldn’t be relevant to your case and therefore inadmissible on that basis, right? If you hear that an eye-witness is about to testify at trial and there has been no § 710.30 notice, but there was an identification procedure, move to preclude the testimony on § 710.30 grounds, as a violation of your client’s right to due process as protected by the New York State and United States constitutions, and on relevance grounds, because if the observation didn’t relate to your client, the testimony is not relevant. Do not ask for a Wade hearing in the middle of trial, as you will then forfeit your preclusion issue on appeal (and you’re not likely to win a Wade hearing, are you?).Pursuant to People v Kirkland, 89 NY2d 903, 904-05 [1996]:When the People intend to offer identification testimony from a witness, a notice of intent must be served upon the defendant specifying the evidence which the People intend to offer” (CPL § 710.30). The notice requirement is excused when a defendant moves for suppression of the identification testimony (CPL § 710.30[3]; People v Merrill, 87 NY2d 948; see also, People v Lopez, 84 NY2d 425). Since the defendant here moved to suppress the identification testimony and received a full hearing on the fairness of the identification procedure, any alleged deficiency in the notice provided by the People was irrelevant.If you find yourself in a situation where the witness is allowed to testify not only to the events, but that the individual he saw bore a resemblance to a famous star (say, a famous rapper), consider obtaining a picture of the rapper, marking it as a court exhibit and making it part of the record, as well as a photo of your client – preferably the one viewed by the witness to demonstrate the similarity – so that it is clear to the appellate court that this was not only testimony about observations of your client, but also clearly identification testimony. I am not suggesting the photo be displayed to the jury – to the contrary – but just that you preserve the picture for the appellate court’s consideration.If you lose these arguments, you may wish to append that photo to a motion for a mistrial. A prosecutor might argue that People v Grajales stands for the proposition that a § 710.30 notice is not required prior to such quasi-identification testimony. If so, you might consider the following from People v Nolasco, 70 AD3d 972 [2nd Dept 2010]:Contrary to the People’s contention, the Court of Appeals’ decision in People v Grajales, 8 NY3d 861, does not excuse their failure to provide such notice. In Grajales, the People provided timely notice pursuant to CPL 710.30(1)(b) that they intended to offer identification testimony from a complainant who had previously made a point-out identification, but the notice failed to mention a pretrial photographic identification made by the same complainant (Id. at 862). The Court in Grajales held that since the People could not have intended to offer the inadmissible photographic identification at trial, the notice pursuant to CPL § 710.30(1)(b) omitting that information was not inadequate for failing to specify this identification (Id.). Here, no statutory notice whatsoever was given by the People as to their intent to offer “testimony regarding an observation of the defendant ... at the time or place of the commission of the offense” to be given by Jose, “a witness who has previously identified him as such” (CPL 710.30[1][b]; see People v Smothers, 20 Misc3d at 658–659). Furthermore, and contrary to the People’s contention, inasmuch as the only motion made by the defendant that could be deemed a motion to suppress Jose’s identification testimony was based on an incident in the courtroom during trial that was wholly unrelated to any pretrial identification, this case does not fall under the exception to the preclusion rule set forth in CPL § 710.30(3) (cf. People v Kirkland, 89 NY2d 903, 904–905). Accordingly, the denial of the defendant’s motion to preclude Jose’s in-court identification deprived him of a fair trial.
↧
Tell One, Tell All, The Risks of Selective Disclosure
On September 6, 2013, the SEC charged the former head of investor relations at First Solar Inc., an Arizona-based solar company, with violating Regulation FD, which is designed to prevent issuers from selectively disclosing material nonpublic information to certain market Read More
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
