Quantcast
Channel: Recent Criminal Law posts - Justia BlawgSearch.com
Viewing all 71824 articles
Browse latest View live

Can I still drive an employer vehicle - if I am required to have the Ignition Interlock device?

0
0
Yes. There is an employer exemption. Although, you must wait 30 days (365 if 2nd or subsequent violation) after having the ignition interlock device installed on your own personal vehicle before you can exercise the employer exemption. The ignition interlock...

CONVICTION STANDS IF ONLINE RESEARCH BY JUROR DOES NOT CAUSE BIAS

0
0
The Sixth Court of Appeals in Texarkana, Texas announced its decision last month in an appeal involving allegations of juror misconduct. The issue was raised in an appeal from a conviction in Tarrant County, with the case transferred from the Fort Worth Court of Appeals to the Texarkana Court. The right of every accused person to have a trial by an impartial jury is guaranteed by the United States Constitution. In today's world, maintaining the impartiality of the jury is made more complicated by modern technology, including the Internet and smart phones. During the jury selection of a murder trial in Fort Worth, one of the potential jurors read an article on his smart phone that discussed the victim's murder and his family. The article did not mention the defendant. The jurors had not yet been told that is was improper for them to seek out information about the case. At the end of jury selection, the judge instructed the prospective jurors not to research the case on their own. A juror informed the judge that he had already read an article about the murder, but that he was still able to be fair and impartial. The Court of Appeals held that there could not be juror misconduct if the juror did not know he was doing anything wrong. The appellate court said that in order to justify a mistrial, which was requested by the defense counsel, it must be shown that a juror was actually biased by the information that he received. In this case, no such showing was made. Impartial juries are fundamental to a fair trial, and a fair trial is the only way to ensure a reliable result. Lawyers and judges will say that jury selection is often the most important part of a trial. Jurors must exercise the utmost care when they are called to perform their duty. A defendant's liberty is usually at stake.

Sen. Gillibrand on Why We Need Military Justice Improvement Act (MJIA)

USO DE INTERNET POR JURADOS NO PERJUDICAR LA CONDENA SI NO RESULTO AL MENOS UN JURADO El CONVERTIRSE PARCIALIZADOS

0
0
El Sexto Tribunal de Apelaciones en Texarkana, Texas anunció su decisión el mes pasado en una apelación involucra acusaciones de mala conducta del jurado. La cuestión se planteó en la apelación de una condena en el Condado de Tarrant, con el caso transferido de la Corte de Apelaciones de Fort Worth al Tribunal Texarkana. El derecho de toda persona acusada a un juicio por un jurado imparcial está garantizado por la Constitución de los Estados Unidos. En el mundo actual, el mantenimiento de la imparcialidad del jurado se hace más complicada por la tecnología moderna, incluyendo el Internet y los teléfonos inteligentes. Durante la selección del jurado de un juicio por asesinato en Fort Worth, uno de los posibles miembros del jurado leyó un artículo en su celular-"Smart phone" (teléfono inteligente) que analiza el asesinato de la víctima y su familia. El artículo no menciona la parte demandada. El jurado aún no se les había dicho que es era inadecuado que buscan información sobre el caso. Al final de la selección del jurado, el juez ordenó a los posibles miembros del jurado de no investigar el caso por su cuenta. Un miembro del jurado informó al juez de que él ya había leído un artículo sobre el asesinato, pero que todavía era capaz de ser justo e imparcial. El Tribunal de Apelaciones sostuvo que no puede haber mala conducta del jurado si el jurado no sabía que estaba haciendo algo malo. La corte de apelaciones dijo que con el fin de justificar la anulación del juicio, que fue solicitado por el abogado defensor, se debe demostrar que un miembro del jurado en realidad estaba sesgada por la información que había recibido. En este caso, no se hizo tal demostración. Jurados imparciales son fundamentales para un juicio justo, ya un juicio justo es la única manera de garantizar un resultado fiable. Los abogados y los jueces dicen que la selección del jurado es a menudo la parte más importante de un juicio. Los miembros del jurado deben ejercer el máximo cuidado cuando se les llama a cumplir con su deber. La libertad de un acusado es por lo general en juego.

Tuesday Night TV and Open Thread

0
0
I'm really glad the Voice is back. Also, Camelia la Tejana begins tonight on Telemundo. I hope it's better than Unimas' La Viuda Blanca, the story of Griselda Blanca, which started Sunday. So far I don't like it at all. ... [[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]

Featured Paper: Bridging the Cellular Divide: A Search for Consensus Regarding Law Enforcement Access to Historical Cell Data

0
0
From the February 2014 Issue of the Cardozo Law Review:Zachary Ross, Bridging the Cellular Divide: A Search for Consensus Regarding Law Enforcement Access to Historical Cell Data.Excerpt:Technological change is often a double-edged sword--it enables and enriches our lives, but also allows for new means of exploitation and control. As social, architectural, and market barriers protecting longstanding notions of personal space erode, individuals increasingly rely on the legal system as a defense to arbitrary invasions of privacy. Paradoxically, the same forces that make the need for robust privacy protections more compelling also make the existing legal framework outdated and inapposite. These contradictions are readily apparent in the contemporary debate over the legal restrictions on government access to cell site location information (CSLI). This data, constantly collected by cell phone service providers (CSPs) in order to manage their networks, has the potential to provide a detailed map of an individual cell user's movements from place to place over extended periods of time. Furthermore, the quantity and precision of location data collected by CSPs is constantly increasing, becoming more revealing, and more valuable to law enforcement in the process. Despite the potential intimacy of this data and its growing relevance to criminal investigations, the legal protection afforded CSLI is hotly disputed, and at present varies greatly among (and sometimes even within) jurisdictions-- with courts sometimes requiring a warrant, and sometimes allowing unfettered access upon a lesser evidentiary showing. This lack of uniformity has been exacerbated by a recent Fifth Circuit ruling on government access to CSLI, which generated a different rule than had previously been adopted by the Third Circuit. The vastly disparate treatment of government requests for CSLI has created a chaotic system ripe for abuse, and all but guaranteed Supreme Court review of the issue in the near future, as the Court itself seems to have implicitly acknowledged. This Note will examine the complex interaction between privacy, surveillance, and technology through an exploration of the contested legal terrain governing law enforcement access to historical CSLI--location data recorded by CSPs which reveal an individual's past movements. 

Searches, Cohabitant Consent, and Narrowly Interpreting Bad Precedent

0
0
The Fourth Amendment forbids unreasonable searches and seizures.  The Supreme Court has said this generally requires a warrant to enter a home, with some exceptions.It has long been established, as a general rule, that police may enter a home without...

Director of the New York Methadone Maintenance

0
0
The defendant moves to dismiss the indictment against her claiming that the statutes upon which the charges are founded are unconstitutional. Defendant is alleged to have sold over an ounce of a substance containing methadone to an undercover officer. This alleged sale has given rise to the three charges contained in the indictment; one count relates to the alleged sale and the others to the defendant's possession immediately prior to the sale. A New York Criminal attorney said that the thrust of the defendant's claim with respect to the use of the 'aggregate weight' of the substance possessed and sold as the basis for determining the degree of offense charged in the first and second counts is that it creates irrational distinctions between similar kinds of conduct and imposes unequal punishments upon offenders who have committed virtually identical illegal acts. It is undisputed that the defendant possessed and sold over an ounce of a mixture containing 30 milligrams of methadone in solution with over one ounce of an orange juice preparation. The defendant contends that it is unconstitutional to hold her criminally liable for the possession and sale of more than one ounce where the total controlled substance present constitutes approximately one-tenth of one percent of the aggregate weight of the total mixture or solution. Prior to 1950, the sale of any quantity of narcotic drug was treated as a felony and carried a sentence of up to ten years imprisonment. All possessory offenses, regardless of the quantity involved, were misdemeanors, subject to a maximum sentence of one year. The Revised Penal Law of 1967 eliminated the weight-presumptions from the possession-with-intent-to-sell offense and contained no weight-predicated sale offense. Bare possession of more than one-eighth ounce of heroin, morphine or cocaine was made a class D felony and more than one ounce of cannabis, morphine, heroin or cocaine was made a class C felony. In 1969, the Revised Penal Law was amended to create class A and class B felonies based on the sale or possession of aggregate weights of more than 16 or 8 ounces of heroin, morphine or cocaine. Except for marihuana, no other drug was subject to a sale or possession offense based on weight. Major revision of the penal law provisions with respect to all drugs was proposed by The Temporary State Commission to Evaluate the Drug Laws, a Commission established by the Legislature and charged with the responsibility for recommending changes in law. The Commission's proposals with respect to recodification of the public health law with conforming changes in the penal law were enacted in 1972. Although the Commission proposals with respect to substantive changes in the penalty provisions were rejected by the Legislature, the recommendations contained in the Commission's Interim Report provided the conceptual format for the vastly increased penalties enacted during the 1973 Session of the Legislature. To some extent the challenge to the use of the aggregate weight or volume of the narcotic And the non-narcotic diluent is similar to that made in a plethora of cases. To Be Cont...

MO Supreme Court Refuses to Hear Red Light Camera Cases, Cameras Remain Illegal

0
0
The Missouri Supreme Court decided not to take up cases of three Missouri cites red light camera programs. The Court refused to take up cases by the cites of Creve Coeur and Kansas City and American Traffic Solutions, the company that operates red light cameras in Missouri. The Court also rejected an appeal by the [...]

The Power of the Police to Search Your Home and Property: 2 New High Court Opinions On When Police Can Search Without a Warrant in Texas

0
0
It seems like there are weekly, if not daily, news stories covering excessive force or unwarranted use of police power by law enforcement officers around the country and it is only through the criminal justice system – particularly criminal defense fights and judicial reasoning and opinion – that people can find justice from overzealous police...The post The Power of the Police to Search Your Home and Property: 2 New High Court Opinions On When Police Can Search Without a Warrant in Texas appeared first on Dallas Justice.

Lots of recent (and long-overdue) new concerns about solitary confinement

0
0
Long-time readers know I have bemaoning the enduring use and reliance on extreme solitary confinement in many penal instututions for many years. Indeed, in some of my posts here and here from 2006 on this issue, during a time when...

Restitution Under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act Is Improper for Harms Not Listed in the Statute

0
0
United States v. Maynard, No. 12-5106-cr (2d Cir. Feb. 24, 2014) (Kearse, Jacobs, and Parker), available hereThis important decision holds that, under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act of 1996 ("MVRA"), 18 U.S.C. §§ 3663-64, restitution may be awarded only for the harms enumerated in the statute.The facts were simple: Maynard and Ludwig robbed five banks between September and November 2011. At sentencing, the district court ordered the defendants to pay restitution to the banks under the MVRA. More than half of the restitution was to repay the money stolen during the robberies, and was clearly proper. But the rest included certain expenses paid by one of the banks: (1) paid time-off for the bank's regular staff, and the pay of replacement staff; (2) mileage expenses for the replacement staff; (3) the cost of wanted posters; and (4) the cost of a temporary security guard at the bank after the robbery.The Court noted that the MVRA requires a court to order restitution for the four categories of harm listed in the statute, but makes no other expense reimbursement mandatory. And no provision of the statute gives district courts discretion to order any other restitution. Accordingly, the Court held, only those expenses enumerated in Section 3663A(b) are properly the subject of restitution.Applying this rule to the facts, the Circuit held that aspects of the restitution award were improper. Indeed, the award was proper only to the extent it compensated the bank for the amount stolen during the robbery and for the money it paid its regular staff for the afternoon while the bank was closed as a crime scene. Restitution was proper for the latter expense because the bank derived no benefit from the wages paid while the bank was closed. The bank then reopened, but allowed its regular staff to stay home (with full pay) for a couple of extra days to recover from the stress caused by the robbery. That expense was not a proper subject for restitution, because the bank would have paid the regular staff for these days even if the bank had not been robbed.The wages (and mileage expenses) for the temporary staff also did not fall within the enumerated harms of the MVRA. The temporary staff wages did not compensate for losses such as destruction of property or funeral expenses, and were not necessary to the prosecution or investigation of the offense. While the expense was arguably attributable to the psychological recovery of the regular staff present during the robbery, the MVRA limits recovery for psychological harm to instances of "bodily injury." And even if the wages constituted a "business expense" absorbed by the bank, as the government argued, the MVRA does not include a business expense category.Finally, the Circuit held that restitution for the cost of the wanted posters and the temporary security guard was not authorized. These expenses, the Court concluded, were not "necessary" to the investigation or prosecution of the offense, and did not fall within any other category of harm listed in the statute.    

Eastern Judicial District of the State of Missouri....cont

0
0
A certified copy of the indictment and judgment and conviction is before the Court. An examination of same indicates that this defendant was indicted under Indictment No. 22210 in the Eastern Division of the Eastern Judicial District of the State...

The Long Arm Gets A Little Shorter

0
0
Walden v. Fiore is a law-enforcement-related civil case decided yesterday by the U.S. Supreme Court.Does a police officer conducting a seizure in one state subject himself to civil suit in another state (in this case, on the other side of...

Forfeiture, Assets, Probable Cause, and Hiring Attorneys

0
0
Wrapping up our belated notes on Tuesday's decisions, there is Kaley v. United States:A federal statute, 21 U. S. C. §853(e), authorizes a court to freeze an indicted defendant's assets prior to trial if they would be subject to forfeiture...

Protesting on Military Bases

0
0
The U.S. Supreme Court decided one criminal case today, United States v. Apel.Federal law makes it a crime to reenter a "military . . . installation" after having been ordered not to do so "by any officer or person in...

Two Hour Rule in VTL 1194(2)(a)...cont

0
0
Consent to taking a test which may lead to unscientific results should not make the test results competent or relevant. Courts should determine that such unscientific evidence is irrelevant and thereby should not be admitted into evidence at trial....

Illegal Drug Dealers Still Enjoying the Repeal of the Requirement to Pay Sales Tax on Their Products

0
0
Utah Senate Bill 243, which repealed the Illegal Drug Sales Tax Stamp Act almost two years, may still be heralded as one of the more important legislative measures ever to come before the governor. Getting Rid of Pesky Laws If you are asking yourself, “what was the Illegal Drug Sales Tax Stamp Act?” don’t despair–we’re […]

Bomber Executed in Florida

0
0
Brendan Farrington reports for AP: A drug trafficker who placed a pipe bomb in a gift-wrapped microwave oven in a plot to kill two potential murder witnesses was executed Wednesday for the 1992 death of a Florida highway trooper who...

California Man Charged With $125 Million Medical Glove Ponzi Scheme

0
0
A California man has been arrested and charged with operating a massive Ponzi scheme that took in more than $125 million from investors that thought they were financing a highly profitable business of supplying gloves to the government.  Deepal Wannakuwatte, 63, was charged with multiple offenses, including mail fraud, wire fraud, and bank fraud.  Each of the charges carries a maximum 20-year prison sentence, as well as criminal monetary penalties of up to $250,000.   Wannakuwatte operated International Manufacturing Group ("IMG") and RelyAid Global Healthcare Inc. ("RelyAid") (collectively, the "Companies"), California entities that solicited investors based on purported dealings with the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs ("USVA").  Potential investors were told that the Companies had annual sales exceeding $100 million from lucrative contracts with the USVA.  Based on these representations, Wannakuwatte and the Companies raised at least $125 million from an unknown amount of investors. However, authorities allege that Wannakuwatte grossly overstated the extent of the Companies' dealings with the USVA - indeed, rather than $100 million in sales from the supply of medical gloves, authorities claim that actual sales were just $25,000 per year.  In an example of these significant discrepancies, CBS 13 Sacramento reports that last month, Wannakuwatte altered paperwork orders to modify a $257 invoice to instead show a $12 million invoice. Further details remain scarce about the scheme and the whereabouts of investor funds.   The scheme appears to have began unraveling last August when Wannakuwatte, his wife, and the Companies were sued by a creditor, General Electric Capital Corp. ("GE Capital"), who claimed that RelyAid had defaulted on a loan it had taken out to purportedly build a latex glove factory.  A federal judge recently ordered Wannakuwatte to turnover a $3 million King Air private plane that had been pledged as collateral on the loan.  An FBI arrest warrant indicates that multiple government agencies began investigating Wannakuwatte and the Companies in September, shortly after the filing of the GE Capital lawsuit.   According to Ponzi Clawbacks, a detention hearing is scheduled for tomorrow to assess whether bail will be granted to Wannakuwatte. The scheme is the largest Ponzi scheme uncovered in 2014.  To view statistics about Ponzi schemes uncovered and prosecuted over the past six years, visit Ponzitracker's Ponzi Database here.
Viewing all 71824 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images