Law Firm News
Today's Legal News Bookmark This Website
California Supreme Court halts death penalty measure
Court Line News | 2016/12/21 14:24
The California Supreme Court on Tuesday blocked a voter-approved measure intended to speed up the appeals process for the state's Death Row inmates to give it time to consider a lawsuit challenging the measure.

In a one-page decision, the court stayed the "implementation of all provisions of Proposition 66" and set a timeline for filing briefs in the case.

Proposition 66 would change how appeals are handled, appointing more lawyers to take cases, putting certain types of appeals before trial court judges and setting a five-year deadline for appeals to be heard. Currently, it can take longer than that for an attorney to be assigned to a case and upward of 25 years to exhaust appeals.

The lawsuit by former Attorney General John Van de Kamp and Ron Briggs, whose father wrote the ballot measure that expanded California's death penalty in 1978, said the reform measure would disrupt the courts, cost more money and limit the ability to mount proper appeals. They said the deadlines would set "an inordinately short timeline for the courts to review those complex cases" and result in attorneys cutting corners in their investigations.

Supporters of the measure have called the lawsuit a frivolous stall tactic.

California voters faced two death penalty measures on the November election. They rejected a measure that would have abolished the death penalty and narrowly approved Proposition 66.



Ohio's high court dismisses media lawsuit over bodycam video
Court Line News | 2016/12/21 14:23
The Ohio Supreme Court dismissed a public information lawsuit Tuesday without ruling on its argument that video from police body cameras are public record and should be released on request.

In not taking up the issue, the court noted that the video had already been released — two days after news organizations requested the footage in the July 19, 2015, traffic stop and fatal shooting of a black motorist by a white University of Cincinnati officer.

News organizations including The Associated Press sued Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters last year when he initially refused to release the police bodycam video. Deters released the material after the officer was indicted on charges including murder.

In Tuesday's ruling, Justice Judith Ann Lanzinger wrote that the prosecutor was entitled to review the video first to determine whether any information had to be redacted; she noted that Deters produced the footage six days after he received it.

"We conclude that he responded in a reasonable period of time," she said.

Deters said he was pleased with the decision, saying "it lets the prosecutor do his job to investigate cases before material is released to the media potentially jeopardizing future prosecution."

Attorney Jack Greiner, representing the media groups, called it a narrow decision with little precedent-setting value. He noted it doesn't affect a Dec. 6 ruling by the state Supreme Court that said video footage from police cruiser dash cameras is public record that, with some exceptions, should be promptly released upon request.


High court turns away appeal from former AIG executives
Court Line News | 2016/12/20 14:26
The Supreme Court won't hear an appeal from two former American International Group executives seeking to avoid civil fraud claims on charges they hid hundreds of millions of dollars in losses from investors.

The justices on Monday let stand a lower court ruling that said former chief executive officer Maurice Greenberg and former chief financial officer Howard Smith must stand trial.

executives of manipulating AIG's accounting records to hide hundreds of millions of dollars in losses from investors.

The state seeks an order banning Greenberg from working in the securities industry or as an executive for any public company. It also is seeking $53 million, including bonuses Greenberg received during the period he is alleged to have manipulated the company's finances.

Greenberg was seen at Trump Tower in New York on Monday. He did not stop to speak with the press.


US Supreme Court could hear Charleston company, Lexmark case
Court Line News | 2016/12/03 13:20
A small Charleston company that refills and resells empty toner cartridges could soon be defending itself before the U.S. Supreme Court in a dispute that could affect huge tech companies and pharmaceutical firms.

Lexmark, a Lexington, Kentucky-based printing corporation, sued Impression Products, accusing the company of patent infringement for selling its cartridges, The Charleston Gazette-Mail reported.

At issue is what is known as the first-sale doctrine, a principle limiting a patent holder's rights after a product has been sold once.

Impression Products argued Lexmark's patents on its cartridges are no longer effective after the cartridges are sold, allowing the smaller company to sell them freely. Lexmark cartridges can cost up to hundreds of dollars, and Impression Products sells used ones at a lower price.

In February, a federal court sided with Lexmark, saying the corporation's patent rights weren't exhausted, regardless of whether the cartridges were being purchased from U.S. or foreign suppliers — Impression Products has purchased toner cartridges from Canadian suppliers in the past.

Last month, the federal government recommended the Supreme Court review the case.

Impression Products President Eric Smith explained that while this doesn't guarantee that the justices will review the case, it sharply increases the probability of it happening.

The implications of the case go beyond ink cartridges, as Samsung and Google have backed Impression Products' argument. The tech giants operate foreign supply chains that would have to jump through additional hoops if the first-sale doctrine did not apply for foreign purchases. Pharmaceutical companies such as Pfizer have supported Lexmark, with a Lexmark victory likely giving their own patents greater protection.



ICC prosecutors: US forces may have committed war crimes
Court Line News | 2016/11/14 12:40
U.S. troops and CIA agents could face investigation and possible charges by the International Criminal Court after its chief prosecutor said in a report that they may have committed war crimes by torturing detainees in Afghanistan.

"Members of US armed forces appear to have subjected at least 61 detained persons to torture, cruel treatment, outrages upon personal dignity on the territory of Afghanistan between 1 May 2003 and 31 December 2014," according to the report issued late Monday by Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda's office. Bensouda didn't immediately give any for further comment Tuesday.

The report added that CIA operatives may have subjected at least 27 detainees in Afghanistan, Poland, Romania and Lithuania to "torture, cruel treatment, outrages upon personal dignity and/or rape" between December 2002 and March 2008.

Most of the alleged abuse happened in 2003-2004, the report said, adding that Afghan government forces and the Taliban were also responsible for atrocities.

Prosecutors said they will decide "imminently" whether to seek authorization to open a full-scale investigation in Afghanistan that could lead to war crimes charges.

Param-Preet Singh, associate international justice director at Human Rights Watch, welcomed the publication Tuesday.


Delaware County creates domestic violence court
Court Line News | 2016/11/08 12:40
The Indiana Supreme Court has approved the creation of a domestic violence court in Delaware County.

Delaware County Prosecutor Jeffrey Arnold tells The (Muncie) Star Press all felony domestic battery cases now will be filed in Delaware Circuit Court 1, where Judge Marianne Vorhees presides.

Arnold says the judge volunteered to create the domestic violence court. He says when one judge brings a lot of expertise to a legal area, it creates consistency.

Arnold recently has added a deputy prosecutor, an investigator and a victim advocate to deal exclusively deal with domestic violence cases.

Arnold says Vorhees will continue to preside over other types of criminal cases.


[PREV] [1] ..[40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48].. [85] [NEXT]
All
Lawyer Media News
Legal Marketing News
Headline Legal News
Court Line News
Legal News
Legal Interview
Topics in Legal News
Attorney News
Press Release
Attorney Opinions
Lawyer Blogs
Legal Marketing
Politics
Law Firm News
TikTok content creators sue ..
Abortion consumes US politic..
Trump faces prospect of addi..
Retrial of Harvey Weinstein ..
Starbucks appears likely to ..
Supreme Court will weigh ban..
Court makes it easier to sue..
Judge in Trump case orders m..
Top Europe rights court cond..
Elon Musk will be investigat..
Retired Supreme Court Justic..
The Man Charged in an Illino..
Texas’ migrant arrest law w..
Former Georgia insurance com..
Alabama woman who faked kidn..
A Supreme Court ruling in a ..
Court upholds mandatory pris..
Trump wants N.Y. hush money ..


   Lawyer & Law Firm Sites
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
Oregon DUI Law Attorney
Eugene DUI Lawyer. Criminal Defense Law
www.mjmlawoffice.com
Los Angeles Immigration Documents Service
New Vision Immigration
www.immigrationnew.com
New York Adoption Lawyers
New York Foster Care Lawyers
Adoption Pre-Certification
www.lawrsm.com
 
 
© Lawyer Media News. All rights reserved.

The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Lawyer Media News as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance. Legal Blog postings and hosted comments are available for general educational purposes only and should not be used to assess a specific legal situation. Professional Bar Association Web Design