IDAHO STATE POLICE NEWS RELEASE - generated by our News Release ListServer
DO NOT REPLY
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IDAHO STATE POLICE NEWS RELEASE
District 4 Patrol 218 West Yakima, Jerome, ID 83338-5904 (208) 324-6000
Fax (208) 324-7897
For Immediate Release: 12/21/13 6:32 p.m.
Please direct questions to the District Office
**Update**
On December 21, 2013, at approximately 10:20 a.m., Idaho State Police responded to a one vehicle rollover crash on Interstate 86 at milepost 7, east of Burley, ID.
Cameron Diaz, 32, of Blackfoot, ID, was traveling East on Interstate 86 in a 2001 Chevrolet Tahoe. Diaz lost control of the vehicle, left the roadway and rolled several times. Diaz had three juvenile passengers in the vehicle at the time of the crash. Witnesses immediately responded to the scene, removing two of the juveniles from the vehicle. When medical personnel arrived, Diaz and the third child were extricated from the vehicle. All three children were transported by ground ambulance to Cassia Regional Medical Center in Burley, ID. Diaz succumbed to her injuries at the scene of the crash.
All occupants were wearing their seat belts. Notifications have been made to the family.
The crash remains under investigation.
**End of Update**
The Idaho State Police is currently investigating a one vehicle fatality crash, eastbound on Interstate 86 at milepost 7, east of the Interstate 84, Interstate 86 split. The interstate is not blocked at this time. More information will be provided as it becomes available. Officers are requesting motorists use caution while driving through the area.
-------------
Fatal crash on Interstate 86 east of Burley
↧
↧
Freispruch für Atomforscher im Korruptionsprozess
Mehrere Atomforscher sollen in den Jahren 2004 bis 2008 Gelder von einem schwedischen Atommüllentsorger angenommen haben. Die Staatsanwaltschaft warf den Forschern daher Vorteilsannahme (§ 331 StGB) sowie den Mitarbeitern der Entsorgungsfirma Vorteilsgewährung (§ 333 StGB) vor, als Spiegelbild der Straftat nach dem Wirtschaftsstrafrecht. Schnell war das Strafverfahren gegen einen angeklagten Forscher und einen angeklagten . . . → Read More: Freispruch für Atomforscher im KorruptionsprozessÄhnliche Beiträge:Freispruch vom Vorwurf der GeldwäscheFreispruch und Entschädigung nach Schlägerei am…Freispruch vom Vorwurf der fahrlässigen Tötung für…Freispruch im BrandstiftungsprozessVeruntreuung von Briefmarken
↧
Jotwell Winter Break 2013
Jotwell is taking a short winter break. Posting will resume Monday, January 6, 2014.
Happy Holidays! Thank you for reading, and for your support.
↧
Oklahoma Man Sentenced for Transporting Minor for Sex
An Oklahoma man was sentenced in federal court last week on charges of transporting a minor for sex. Dennis Lewis, 41, of Tulsa was sentenced in the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska to 10 years in prison followed by 5 years of supervised release. Lewis, who was represented by the Federal […]
↧
Hanebüchene Verbiegung des Gesetzes
Heribert Prantl greift heute unter dem Titel „Warum Mord nicht gleich Mord ist“ die Reformbemühungen um den Mord-Tatbestand auf, nachdem die Diskussion auf Initiative von Schleswig-Holsteins Justizministerin Anke Spoorendonk einmal mehr aufflammte. Auch Thomas Fischer, Vorsitzender des 2. Strafsenats am Bundesgerichtshof und Autor des wichtigsten Strafrechts-Kommentars, hält eine Reform für längst überfällig und spricht in […]Original: Hanebüchene Verbiegung des Gesetzes
↧
↧
TN: CP IP address coming back to house is nexus for SW
In a child pornography case, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in computer files open to a file sharing program. When the investigators have the IP address of the computer involved, and they can pinpoint the house address, that is nexus for a search warrant. Defendant didn’t raise a staleness challenge on a 19 day delay in the trial court, so it’s waived. It would lose anyway because the time is so short compared to other cases. State v. Aguilar, 2013 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 1101 (December 18, 2013)* [Note: I’ve never seen a successful staleness challenge in a child pornography case, no matter what the time period.]
Denial of defendant’s suppression motion was waived for appeal by not including it in the motion for new trial. State v. Nix, 2013 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 1102 (December 18, 2013).*
Defendant’s traffic stop that led to his DUI was based on probable cause. State v. Murrell, 2013 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 1104 (December 18, 2013).*
Defendant’s traffic stop that led to his DUI was based on reasonable suspicion. State v. Banks, 2013 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 1105 (December 18, 2013).*
↧
Due Process and the Administrative License Suspension
How can it be constitutional for the State to take my license immediately via the Administrative License Suspension?
Ohio believes that driving is not a right, but a privilege. See 4511.191 If you are stopped for an OVI, DUI or drunk driving and you refuse to take a chemical test (breath, blood or urine), or if your test results exceed the legal limit of Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC), the police officer can and will take [Read the full post. . .]
↧
NJ: Davis good faith exception saves pre-Neely lack of SW in DUI cases
Davis good faith means that the McNeely DUI warrant requirement won’t be applied to cases before it was decided, and McNeely isn’t retroactive. State v. Atkins, 2013 N.J. Super. LEXIS 179 (December 20, 2013).
The affidavit for the search warrant was thin, but, considering the deference given warrants, it was enough under Ventresca and Gates. Here, however, there was more because it was undisputed that the officer gave additional information to the issuing magistrate, but couldn’t remember the details. What he remembered of those unrecorded details, however, were sufficient to get over the bar. [Lack of recordation should be a bigger deal; come on.] United States v. Jackson, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 178374 (E.D. Mo. November 15, 2013), adopted 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 177619 (E.D. Mo. December 17, 2013).*
Officers had exigent circumstances for a warrantless entry into defendant’s apartment. He was armed and believed to have just been involved in a robbery, and there was a small child inside. United States v. Evans, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 25321, 2013 FED App. 1030N (6th Cir. December 16, 2013).
↧
ID: Jardines doesn’t prevent knock-and-talks going to the front door
Jardines doesn’t prevent knock-and-talks going to the front door. Here, officers without a dog could smell marijuaua. State v. Howard, 2013 Ida. App. LEXIS 92 (December 19, 2013):
=> Read more!
↧
↧
Colorado Loses Long-Time Underdog Champion
R.I.P. Ken Gordon, former long-time State legislator, Senate majority and minority leader, adjunct law professor and public defender. He really was one of the good guys.
Ken, age 63, was on his way to work out Sunday but drove to the emergency...
[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]
↧
The Liquor Store, Identity Fraud and "Persons"
--> A jury convicted Rodolfo Lara Martinez “of five counts of forgery in the first degree and two counts of identity fraud”, but the judge later reversed the conviction “on one of the two counts of identity fraud” when he ruled on Martinez’s motion for a new trial. Martinez v. State, __ S.E.2d __ , 2013 WL 6097947 (Georgia Court of Appeals 2013). The opinion notes that the judge reversed the second count of identity fraud because he found that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Martinez committed identity fraud with the second alleged victim – Staffing Zone. Martinez v. State, supra. The surviving identity fraud count was based on the allegation that Martinez obtained and used “the bank account number of the corporate victim, Labor Staffing, Inc.” Martinez v. State, supra. This, according to the opinion, is how the prosecution arose:[T]he evidence shows that on August 14, 2007, Martinez attempted to cash a check at Tower Package Store. The check, dated August 10, 2007, purported to be a payroll check issued by Labor Staffing, Inc., and payable to Martinez in the amount of $139.36. The cashier followed the store's usual practice by attempting to access Martinez's information on her computer, but instead she received instructions to immediately contact store security. The security officer determined that, according to the computer-generated information, the check was fraudulent, and so he detained Martinez and notified the DeKalb County Police.When the responding detective arrived, the security officer gave him copies of four checks that had been previously cashed at the store by Martinez, but that had been returned by the bank as counterfeit. And after the detective arrested Martinez and read him his Miranda rights, Martinez claimed he was `paid that money for doing construction work.’ But when the detective offered to drive Martinez to any location where he performed work in order to confirm his story, Martinez was unable to remember any work location or name, address, or telephone number associated with his alleged employers. At trial, the evidence showed that Martinez previously cashed four checks at the Tower Package Store dated May 25, May 26, May 29, and June 2, 2007, in the amounts of $98.76, $97.86, $148.61, and $146.64, respectively. All four checks purported to be payroll checks issued by Staff Zone, Inc. But according to Staff Zones's manager, the company did not issue any payroll checks to Martinez. The manager also examined photocopies of the checks purported to have been issued by Staff Zone and testified that they were not, in fact, company checks. And as to the check purported to have been issued by Labor Staffing, Inc., and which Martinez attempted to cash at Tower Package Store on August 14, 2007, Labor Staffing's employee in charge of accounting and payroll testified that it was not an authentic corporate check and that the real check bearing the same check number had already been issued by the company to another person in a different amount.Martinez v. State, supra. On appeal, Martinez challenged his convictions for both crimes. The Court of Appeals rejected his challenges to his conviction for forgery in the first degree for reasons that are not relevant to the issues addressed in this post. Martinez v. State, supra. It focused on his challenges to the identity fraud convictions. Martinez v. State, supra. Basically, Martinez argued that (i) “the crime of identity fraud, as applicable to the August 2007 incident at issue, protected only the identifying information of natural persons and not corporations” and (ii) his defense attorney was ineffective because he did not object to how the trial judge instructed the jury on the elements of identity fraud and/or because he did not take actions to challenge his convictions on the identity fraud counts. Martinez v. State, supra (emphasis in the original). As I noted in an earlier post, most identity theft/identity fraud statutes make it a crime to steal a real person’s identity and do not encompass identify theft targeting corporations and other artificial entities. The Court of Appeals began its analysis of Martinez’s first argument by explaining that[i]t is undisputed that before May 24, 2007, a victim of the crime of identity fraud was not limited to natural persons. Under [Georgia Code] § 16–9–121(1), as amended in 2002, a person committed identity fraud if, inter alia, he or she `with the intent unlawfully to appropriate resources of or cause physical harm to that person . . . [o]btains or records identifying information of a person which would assist in accessing the resources of that person or any other person.’ Under [Georgia Code § 16–1–3], which contains the definitions of certain words used in Title 16, and which has not been amended since 1982, a `person’ is `an individual, a public or private corporation, an incorporated association, government, government agency, partnership, or unincorporated association.’ Thus, a `person,’ which was not separately defined for purposes of the article governing identity fraud, necessarily included corporate victims before May 24, 2007.And under the current version of the statute, a person commits the crime of identity fraud when, inter alia, `he or she willfully and fraudulently . . . [w]ithout authorization or consent, uses or possesses with intent to fraudulently use identifying information concerning a person.’ Again, in light of the definition of the term for purposes of Title 16, there is no doubt that a `person’ encompasses corporate victims.Martinez v. State, supra (emphasis in the original). The court then noted thatin August 2007, when Martinez used the identifying information of Labor Staffing, the law provided that a person commits the offense of identity fraud when, as applicable here, `he or she willfully and fraudulently . . . [w]ithout authorization or consent, uses or possesses with intent to fraudulently use, identifying information concerning an individual.’ And unlike `person,’ there is no definition for `individual’ in Title 16. The question squarely presented, then, is whether the fraudulent use or possession of the identifying information of a corporation was punishable as the crime of identity fraud under [Georgia Code] § 16–9–121 (2007).Martinez v. State, supra (emphasis in the original). The Court of Appeals then explained thatas with any question of statutory interpretation, we necessarily begin our analysis with familiar and binding canons of construction. Indeed, in considering the meaning of a statute, our charge as an appellate court is to `presume that the General Assembly meant what it said and said what it meant.’ And toward that end, we must afford the statutory text its plain and ordinary meaning,consider the text contextually, and read the text `in its most natural and reasonable way, as an ordinary speaker of the English language would.’ In sum, where the language of a statute is plain and susceptible of only one natural and reasonable construction, `courts must construe the statute accordingly.’ Martinez v. State, supra (quoting Deal v. Coleman, 2013 WL 6050665 (Georgia Supreme Court 2013). The court began that task by pointing out that[i]n the case sub judice, we first consider the ordinary meaning of `individual,’ as it is not a term of artor a technical term. In its common meaning, an `individual’ is an actual human being. And this appears to be the way `individual’ is used in the definition of “person” in [Georgia Code] § 16–1–3(12), so as to differentiate a natural person from other entities, such as corporations. [Georgia Code] § 16–9–121 (2007) also used the term `person,’ but in the context of the perpetrator or in the context of fraud committed `on another person,’ but not in the context of the victim whose identifying information was being used or possessed. This, of course, is entirely consistent with the General Assembly having intended that `individual’ refer to a natural person, not a corporation.Martinez v. State, supra. The Court of Appeals also found that[f]urthermore, and of some significance, when the General Assembly again changed the law in 2010, it was `[t]o amend Article 8 of Chapter 9 of Title 16 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to identity fraud, so as to revise a term so as to includebusinesses as potential identity theft victims.’ And tellingly, the law was then amended so as to substitute `person’ for `individual’ in the text of [Georgia Code] § 16–9–121(a)(1), (4), and (5). It follows, then, that no rational trier of fact could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that Martinez committed the crime of identity fraud against `an individual’ by using the identifying information of Labor Staffing, a corporation, in a manner otherwise prohibited by [Georgia Code] § 16–9–121 (2007).Martinez v. State, supra (emphasis in the original).The Court of Appeals therefore held that “Martinez's identity-fraud conviction must be reversed,and Martinez's claims that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance are moot.” Martinez v. State, supra.
↧
2013 Ponzi Schemes In Review: Nearly $3 Billion of Ponzi Schemes, Over 1,000 Years Of Prison Time
While now a household word thanks in part to infamous schemers such as Bernard Madoff and Allen Stanford, many do not realize how pervasive Ponzi schemes have become. Indeed, while the larger schemes such as Madoff, Stanford, and Petters make headlines for defrauding thousands of victims out of billions of dollars, the majority of Ponzi schemes are much smaller in size and do not achieve such widespread coverage despite causing the same damage to their victims. With this in mind, Ponzitracker presents a comprehensive database containing both new Ponzi schemes uncovered in 2013 and the sentences handed down to Ponzi fraudsters in 2013. The simple truth is that there is no resource compiling these statistics in an easily accessible format, and this resource aims to fill that gap.
While the figures below include a more thorough summary, the numbers behind Ponzi schemes in 2013 are truly staggering. At least 67 Ponzi schemes were exposed in 2013, with the average Ponzi scheme coming in at approximately $44 million. In terms of sentencing, over 1,000 total years of sentences were handed down to at least 117 individuals involved in Ponzi schemes, and the total dollar amount of the underlying Ponzi schemes exceeded $13 billion. Males were the predominant perpetrators, constituting approximately 90% of the individuals being sentenced.
As a disclaimer, this database is meant for educational purposes only, and was compiled through articles published on Ponzitracker as well as through reporting available on the internet through various sources. Kathy Phelps' monthly Ponzi roundups at ThePonziBook.com were also a great resource. The database generally only included Ponzi schemes of $1 million or more. Plesae feel free to direct any comments or inquiries to inquiries@ponzitracker.com.
2013 Ponzi Schemes
2013 was a busy year in the Ponzi Scheme world. In total, at least 67 Ponzi schemes were uncovered, with the total cumulative dollar amount of nearly $3,000,000,000 - that's 3 billion dollars. This equated to the discovery of a Ponzi scheme (1) more than once per week, (2) every 5.4 days, or (3) every 130 hours. This included at least eight Ponzi schemes with estimated losses or at least $100,000,000 or more, with Edward Fujinaga's estimated $800,000,000 Ponzi scheme ranking as the largest Ponzi scheme exposed in 2013.
A full database containing Ponzi schemes uncovered in 2013, arranged by date, is below:
In terms of sentences handed down, at least 117 offenders received prison sentences that totaled more than 1,000 years. These sentences ranged from mere months to decades in prison, with Karen Bowie's 42-year sentence ranking as the highest Ponzi sentence handed down in 2013. The total dollar amount of the Ponzi schemes for which sentences were levied: over $13 billion.
A full database of the sentences handed down in 2013 is below:
Ponzi schemers receiving prison sentences in 2013 hailed from more than half of the fifty states, with California, Texas, Florida, and New York unsurprisingly harboring over 40% of the offenders. A chart displaying the amount of sentenced offenders per state is below:
↧
TPPF: 'Texas should lead on restorative justice'
Derek Cohen of the Texas Public Policy Foundation has an interesting essay in the SA Express-News titled, "Texas should lead on restorative justice." The article opens:As children, we learn two wrongs don't make a right. However, a wrong can often be made right. To accomplish this in the criminal justice system, we must prioritize the role of wronged individuals, rather than viewing the government as the victim. Our legal tradition marginalizes the victim from the process. The government also has primary claim to all payments received from the offender, often put toward satisfying court fees and criminal fines before they are passed on to the victim. If the offender is incarcerated, a victim is likely to see little to no restitution. While incarceration may be necessary to incapacitate violent offenders and career property offenders, Texas puts many offenders in jail for offenses such as shoplifting and hot checks, where a restorative justice approach that emphasizes restitution could achieve better results for victims, taxpayers and offenders.Restorative justice programs place the focus on the victim. The victim, in mediation with the offender, establishes an agreement involving an apology, restitution, and, in many cases, community service. These programs can begin before or after the trial phase, all with the consent of the victim. The mediation begins with the victim or a proxy acknowledging to the offender the harm caused. The offender accepts responsibility and begins working toward repayment. Ideally, restorative justice programs are entered into as diversions, not as a formal sanction. This ensures “good faith” by the offender, as opposed to a ploy to avoid punishment. Globally, victim-offender mediation programs have shown promise, particularly for nonviolent and first-time offenders. They decrease repeat offenses and increase the percentage of victims who receive restitution. These programs also cut costs over traditional forms of sentencing. See also Cohen's recent report, "Reviving Restorative Justice: A Blueprint for Texas" (pdf). Go here for more background on restorative justice.
↧
↧
Court of Appeals Vacates Rape Sentence. Firm Represented Defendant.
The Twelfth District Court of Appeals has vacated a twenty year rape sentence imposed on an elderly man. Joshua Adam Engel represented the defendant in this appeal. The case is State v. Stamper. The Defendant pled guilty to three counts of rape in violation of R.C. 2907.02(A)(1)(c) (first-degree felonies). In exchange for appellant’s guilty plea, the […]
↧
'Santa was in prison and Jesus got the death penalty'
Concludes a terrific post from Solitary Watch on the topic, "Christians go to church to worship an executed savior and shop to commemorate an incarcerated saint. And most Americans give little thought to their 2 million countrymen who are spending this Christmas behind bars."While most folks are familiar with Jesus' fateful run-in with the criminal justice system, "Less well known is the fact that Saint Nicholas, the early Christian saint who inspired Santa Claus, was once a prisoner, like one in every 100 Americans today. Though he was beloved for his kindness and generosity, Nicholas acquired sainthood not only by giving alms, but by performing a miracle that more or less amounted to a prison break."
↧
Ocean County Man Arrested by Manchester Twp. Police, Charged with Marijuana Possession and Weapons
Depending on the type of DWI or drug DUI offense, the evidence against a motorist can portend some stiff penalties, in terms of fines, fees and assessments, as well as possible jail time. Regardless of the ultimate charges, it is safe to say that most every impaired driving arrest sometimes starts with a simple mistake made by a driver in the presence of a police officer. This can happen in small towns, larger cities or on the parkway or interstate.
No one can say what basic traffic law may be breached in order for a municipal cop or state trooper to effect a roadside stop, but once it does happen, all bets are off. Any evidence discovered during the ensuing traffic stop will likely be used by the prosecution in an effort to obtain a guilty verdict later in court. As Garden State DWI defense attorneys, my legal team is ready and willing to offer its expertise to those driver accused of drunken driving or drug-impaired motor vehicle operation.
Aside from DWI or DUI, other charges -- either tied to an impaired driving charge or arising from the initial traffic stop -- may be forthcoming. Breath test refusal, possession of a controlled dangerous substance (CDS), or other infraction may also result in an arrest and possible charges against the motorist. We often read of instances where people have been pulled over for one reason, only to be taken into custody for something less expected, at least to the police and third-party observers. Take for instance a news item we ran across a little while ago.
↧
D.C. Criminal Defense Lawyers: Preserve Your Right to Appeal
Preserving your right to appeal a criminal conviction is one of the most important things your D.C. defense lawyer can help you do - aside from, of course, helping you to avoid a conviction in the first place.
A good lawyer knows that preserving this right means being highly involved throughout the case. If the issue of contention is not first raised to the lower court for consideration, the chances of having the appellate court accept the matter for review are slim.
This is important because if the lower court errs on a matter of law or an issue of fairness, it probably won't correct itself. An appellate court is your chance to have that matter reconsidered. You don't want to forgo that chance because it could be your next best chance to have the case against you dropped.
↧
↧
//blawgsearch75.rssing.com/chan-6519914/article4718-live.html
United States v. Shorty, No. 12-20-13) (12-20-13) (Reinhardt with Noonan and Watford)(Note: This is an Az FPD case). The 9th reverses the conviction and remands for failure to perform an adequate colloquy for the waiver of jury. A jury can be waived under Fed R Crim P 23, but it requires waiver in writing, government consent, court approval, and, under case law, that the waiver be knowing and intelligent. Even though the waiver must be written, the court has said, well, "not really," but then the oral waiver is given much stricter scrutiny. Here, the defendant had a low IQ, and was learning disabled. There was no written waiver. The colloquy was inadequate to see if the defendant really knew about his jury rights; and whether he intelligently was giving up the right to a 12 person jury, what a jury was, that it had to be unanimous, that he could participate in selection, and finally, that the court would then determine the facts. The 9th reversed. The 9th however did not find the evidence on the aiding and abetting claim was insufficient and so there was no double jeopardy bar to retrial.Congrats to Lee Tucker, AFPD in the Az FPD (Tucson).
↧
//blawgsearch75.rssing.com/chan-6519914/article4719-live.html
United States v. DeJarnette, No. 11-10606 (12-20-13) (Tashima with Noonan; dissent by Graber). The 9th reversed a conviction for failure to register under SORNA and remanded for a judgment of acquittal. This involved a retroactivity interpretation of the AG's regulations. Under the facts, the defendant had a 2001 sex offense. His failure to register as a sex offender in the county where the offense took place, as opposed to where he resided, led to the charge. The 9th held that the retroactive application of SORNA's registration requirements had not specified by the AG to that requirement (county of offense). The jury instruction allowing conviction solely on the basis of failure to register in the county of the offense was erroneous and not harmless. Dissenting, Graber said that the registration requirement covers all sex offenders, including pre-SORNA offenders, and that he was specifically informed of his requirement.
↧
Judge Says Ohio Is Not Like North Korea Or Cuba In Elmwood Place Speed Camera Hearing
The Elmwood Place Speed Camera litigation moved forward in the Hamilton County Common Pleas Court. Last, week, Judge Ruehlman heard arguments from both parties of “summary judgment.” Both sides urged the court to issue a final decision. The Plaintiffs, represented by Mike Allen & Associates, are seeking an order forcing Elmwood Place to repay all […]
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
