| Edit Column |
Delete Column |
|
| Edit |
Delete |
1st Circuit
FALSE CLAIMS
U.S. v. Davis, May-10-2013
J. Howard finds that the lower court properly convicted appellant of aiding and abetting the making of a false claim against the United States in connection with his 2008 federal income tax return. There is no dispute that appellant's return contained a false claim for the homebuyer tax credit to which he was not entitled, that he knew that his 2008 federal tax return contained a false claim, and that he helped the principal, the tax preparer, file the false claim. Affirmed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
2nd Circuit
CIVIL PROCEDURE
RLI Insurance Co. v. JDJ Marine, May-10-2013
Per curiam, the circuit finds that petitioner cannot reinstate his appeal after he failed to submit a brief by the deadline. The court had granted appellate counsel an extension of 30 days, after counsel cited delays due to Hurricane Sandy. The order gave a March 1, 2013 deadline and cautioned that "a motion for reconsideration or other relief will not stay the effectiveness of this order." A second extension is not warranted because "the press of other business is not an 'extraordinary circumstance' justifying an extension under our rules."
|
| Edit |
Delete |
4th Circuit
BANKRUPTCY, BANKING/LENDING
Branigan v. Davis, May-10-2013
J. Diaz finds that the district court properly stripped off junior liens against the debtors' residences. Appellant, a Chapter 13 bankruptcy trustee, argues that a per se rule barring lien-stripping in "Chapter 20" cases was created in the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005. But stripping off valueless liens, meaning "a lien secured by collateral without a single penny of value to support it," is consistent with the Bankruptcy Code. The Act "does not bar the orders entered by the bankruptcy court," and "the law already provides a mechanism for preventing abuse of the bankruptcy process without the creation of a per se rule against lien-stripping." Affirmed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
4th Circuit
MEDICAID, AGENCY
L.S. v. Shipman, May-10-2013
J. Wilkinson finds that defendants' appeal from being ordered to reinstate plaintiffs' health care services to their prior levels should be dismissed. Plaintiffs receive "managed care Medicaid" for severe developmental disabilities such as cerebral palsy, seizure disorders, mental retardation and autism. The relevant statute requires each state to designate a "single State agency" to administer its Medicaid plan, which in this case is the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services. A regulation prohibits Piedmont Behavioral Healthcare, a local subdivision of the state, from changing or disapproving any administrative decision of that agency, and the Department complied with the injunction.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
6th Circuit
CONTRACT
Gardner v. Heartland Industrial Partners, May-10-2013
J. Kethledge holds that the district court improperly dismissed this breach of contract case, wherein defendant's purposefully invalidated the Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan in order to sell its ownership interest in the company. Under Michigan law, one party's complete repudiation of a contract is enough to establish a breach. If, before the time of performance, a party to a contract unequivocally declares the intent not to perform, the innocent party has the option to sue immediately for the breach of contract. Reversed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
6th Circuit
SENTENCING
U.S. v. Washington, May-10-2013
J. Hood holds that the district court improperly sentenced defendant in this carjacking case. The government concedes that the chronological ordering of offenses for sentencing purposes was erroneous. The rule of lenity cautions that such doubt be resolved in a defendant's favor, and the court should not interpret a federal criminal statute so as to increase the penalty that it places on an individual when such an interpretation can be based on no more than a guess as to what Congress intended. Reversed in part.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
6th Circuit
FRAUD, JURY
U.S. v. Kennedy, May-10-2013
J. Gilman holds that the district court properly convicted and sentenced defendants, who solicited money to invest in real estate deals with the promise of a lucrative return. The evidence established that defendants were both willful participants in a scheme to defraud. Defendant failed to cite any authority that supported his proposition that he had the right to know the vote count revealed in the jury note. The court's application of the obstruction of justice enhancement was appropriate because defendant's testimony did not appear to be the result of confusion, mistake, or faulty memory. Affirmed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
6th Circuit
IMMUNITY
Smith v. Stoneburner, May-10-2013
J. Sutton holds that the district court properly denied qualified immunity to two officers who unconstitutionally entered plaintiffs' home two times and used excessive force against them. The officers failed to meet the requirements to justify a warrantless entry to arrest plaintiff. Michigan law does not authorize police officers to enter a home without a warrant to make an arrest for a misdemeanor crime. Affirmed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
6th Circuit
ZONING, EDUCATION
Spurlock v. Fox, May-10-2013
J. Gilman holds that the district court properly found in favor of the school board in the class action claiming racial resegregation in the Nashville public school system. The school board's rezoning plain is constitutional because the board is trying to remedy the district's problem and attain a more efficient allocation of educational resources. The Rezoning Plan meaningfully addressed the under-utilization problem by adjusting school-zone boundaries, redesignating certain schools, recommending school-specific reforms, and allocating more resources to areas with under-utilized schools. Affirmed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
7th Circuit
SEX OFFENDER, WITNESS, EVIDENCE
U.S. v. Roux, May-10-2013
J. Rovner finds that a man was properly convicted of coercing his girlfriend's minor daughter to create sexually explicit images of herself. Testimony about defendant's past sexual abuse offered by the victim's siblings was admissible. Moreover, the prosecutor's reference to two recorded telephone conversations that defendant had made while in pretrial detention as "jail phone calls" and cross-examination questions pointing out that defendant's testimony lacked corroborating evidence did not warrant a mistrial. Affirmed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
7th Circuit
DRUG OFFENDER, FIREARMS, SENTENCING
Brown v. Caraway, May-10-2013
J. Flaum finds that a man convicted of drug and weapons violations in Delaware should be resentenced. Petitioner was convicted of possessing cocaine base with intent to distribute and possession of firearm by a felon. He was sentenced as a career offender based in part on a prior conviction for Arson in the Third Degree under Delaware law. Petitioner may seek relief under 28 U.S.C. section 2241 and should not have been sentenced as a career offender because the state charge of which he was convicted does not qualify as "generic" arson under the enumerated crimes clause of the career offender Guideline and is not covered by the residual clause. Reversed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
8th Circuit
CONSTITUTION, ATTORNEY FEES
Doe v. Nixon, May-10-2013
J. Riley finds that the lower court properly granted plaintiffs only partial attorney fees. Plaintiffs are people who are required to register as sex offenders in Missouri and who ultimately partially prevailed in a suit to overturn a Missouri law preventing them from having any contact with children on Halloween. Plaintiffs were prevailing parties for purposes of the attorney fees statute in some respects, but much of suit was generally dismissed on mootness grounds. Defendants cannot be held liable for attorney fees on issues that they voluntarily admitted. Because the order recognizes defendants' declaration acknowledging that they are barred from enforcing the Halloween statute, the issue is moot. Affirmed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
8th Circuit
CIVIL RIGHTS, CIVIL PROCEDURE
Meyers v. Roy, May-10-2013
J. Colloton finds that the lower court properly upheld Minnesota's predatory offender statute and dismissed plaintiff's civil rights suit. The statute requires registration for ten years for people charged with various offenses. Plaintiff already had a full and fair opportunity to litigate his claims during his criminal case. Also, his other substantive due process claims regarding interstate travel have been waived since he did not raise them below. Affirmed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
9th Circuit
HABEAS, DRUG OFFENDER, CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
McCullough v. Graber, May-10-2013
J. Burgess finds that the habeas court properly denied plaintiff's petition for relief from drug trafficking convictions. The petition is moot, as plaintiff requested relief under a program that no longer exits.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Alaska Supreme Court
DUI, SENTENCING
Bottcher v. Alaska, May-10-2013
J. Stowers finds that the superior court properly revoked defendant's driver's license for life after defendant hit and killed a child while driving drunk. A finding of chronic offender status is not required to order a lifetime revocation of a license because, under Dodge, a court can impose a lifetime revocation in extreme cases when such a revocation is required to protect the public. Defendant has a long history of alcohol abuse, he fled the scene of a crime, and he tried to bribe a bystander. Affirmed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Arizona Court Of Appeals, Division Two
CIVIL PROCEDURE
Whillock v. Arizona, May-10-2013
J. Kelly holds that respondent judge improperly treated petitioner's motion for a new trial as a motion for reconsideration in this animal cruelty case. Nothing in the applicable rules suggests that a request for a trial de novo precludes the filing of an appellate memorandum. The relevant state rule says that a defendant may request that the trial court order a trial de novo on the basis that the record is insufficient for an appeal on the record.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
California Courts Of Appeal
ASSAULT, EVIDENCE, SELF INCRIMINATION
People v. Ramos, May-10-2013
J. Murray finds that a trial court correctly convicted defendants of various forms of felony assault. Any error the trial court might have made in allowing a police officer to testify that defendant Maritza was uncooperative and refused to give a statement regarding the attacks was harmless, since she never objected to evidence where she expressly invoked her Fifth Amendment rights. The trial court made its decision to admit the evidence based on facts it knew at the time, rendering any error harmless. Affirmed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
California Courts Of Appeal
CLASS ACTIONS, LABOR
Faulkinberry v. Boyd & Associates, May-10-2013
J. Fybel finds that a trial court incorrectly refused to certify plaintiffs' labor class action against defendant. The questions of fact involving plaintiffs' claims that defendant's meal break policy violate the law cover all 4,000 members of the proposed class, since evidence exists that defendant applied its policy to all employees equally. Similarly, the lawfulness of defendant's lack of rest breaks and requirement that its employees remain at their stations at all times can be decided on a classwide basis. Reversed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
California Courts Of Appeal
THREATS, EVIDENCE
People v. Fisher, May-10-2013
J. Hoch finds that a trial court correctly convicted defendant of extortion. Despite defendant's contention of insufficient evidence, the fact that he handed the victim a letter demanding a job and a paycheck to keep from having his vehicle's paint sandpapered constitutes sufficient evidence for his conviction. Affirmed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Court Of Federal Claims
CONTRACT
Beechcraft Defense Co. v. U.S., May-10-2013
J. Miller finds that the U.S. Air Force properly awarded a contract for aircraft to be given to the Afghan Air Force as part of its planned 2014 withdrawal from the country. Plaintiff filed a protest with the Government Accountability Officer after the award was made. Although the Air Force originally stayed performance of the contract, it later overrode the stay and directed the winning bidder to resume performance. The Air Force considered the relevant factors and determined that the override was supported by urgent and compelling circumstances including strained international relations and possible loss of life.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Court Of International Trade
COMMERCE
EOS of North America v. U.S., May-10-2013
J. Stanceu holds that customs properly classified appellant's M270 laser system in subheading 8479.89.98, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the U.S., subject to duty at 2.5 percent, and the P390 system in subheading 8477.80.00, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the U.S., subject to duty at 3.1 percent. No other terms properly describe the items. Affirmed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Court Of International Trade
COMMERCE
Nan Ya Plastics Corp. America v. U.S., May-10-2013
J. Stanceu finds that certain administrative decisions taken by the U.S. International Trade Commission and U.S. Customs and Border Protection under the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000, aka the Byrd Amendment, which denied appellant eligibility to receive disbursements of anti-dumping duties collected under orders of certain polyester staple fiber from Korea and Taiwan were analyzed under the incorrect statute. Under an amended version of the law, plaintiff qualifies as an "affected domestic producer" and may be eligible for disbursements. Reversed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
DC Circuit
ENERGY, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
Southern California Edison Co. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, May-10-2013
J. Rogers finds that respondent improperly updated a base return on equity, but properly measured the return initially. Petitioner challenged respondent's regulatory mechanism for recovering the costs of transmission projects. Under the Federal Power Act, respondent may reasonably adjust transmission revenue requirements. Setting the base rate at the media, rather than the midpoint of the range established by a proxy group of publicly-traded companies was reasonable and fair. However, respondent should not have updated the rate to reflect recently available financial data, based on the average yields on 10-year U.S. Treasury bonds. Reversed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Delaware Court of Chancery
CLASS ACTIONS, FIDUCIARY DUTY, CORPORATIONS
In re Primedia Inc. Shareholders Litigation v. , May-10-2013
Defendants' motion to dismiss prevails on all counts except for plaintiffs' entire fairness claim for breach of fiduciary duty against KKR and the members of the Primedia Inc. board. Plaintiffs claim that the merger between Primedia and TPG Capital LP was unfair because the Primedia directors failed to obtain any value for plaintiffs' derivative action claim, which was filed previous to the class action. That derivative claim sought disgorgement of Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Company's profits for alleged insider trading connected with KKR's purchase of Primedia's preferred stock in 2002. In this class action complaint, plaintiffs have pleaded a reasonably conceivable theory that Primedia's merger conferred a special benefit on KKR because it was highly unlikely that any acquirer would sue KKR for insider trading if they were not asked to pay any consideration for plaintiffs' derivative claim. Plaintiffs pass the three part test under "Parnes," as a full disgorgement of KKR's profits would confer $80 million for the minor shareholders of Primedia. Plaintiffs' other claims, including an aiding and abetting claim, fail.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Delaware Court of Chancery
ARBITRATION, TORT
Lynn v. Ullrich, May-10-2013
Master LeGrow denies plaintiff's petition to enforce an arbitration agreement involving an automobile accident. Although the parties agreed to binding arbitration, the named arbitrator has refused to arbitrate defendant Ullrich's claims because he believes he is a partial and biased judge for the matter. The court will not force an arbitrator to violate his ethical obligations, even if securing a new arbitrator would "harm" the process of using binding arbitration in personal injury actions.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Federal Circuit
PATENT
Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland v. Genentech, May-10-2013
J. Reyna holds that defendant is not entitled to an injunction preventing plaintiff from proceeding in a previously filed foreign arbitration of a license to that patent. Plaintiff sued Genentech and Biogen Idec based on sales of the allegedly infringing drugs Rituxan and Avastin and this court affirmed the district court's finding of no infringement. Defendant failed to show that the parties in the foreign arbitration are the same as the U.S. case. Also, "an injunction would frustrate the policies of [the U.S.] in favor of enforcement of forum selection clauses in arbitration agreements." Affirmed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Florida Courts Of Appeal
PROBATION
Selig v. Florida, May-10-2013
J. Davis finds that the trial court improperly held that appellant violated probation by failing to account for three unexplained out-of-range alerts of his GPS monitoring bracelet. At the time, he was living next to a dumpster behind the probation office while he searched for a place to stay, and was using an outlet on the outside of the building to charge his monitor. The testimony showed that he was always at his "residence" on the mornings following each of the alerts, which occurred during times when he said he was asleep. The trial court wrongly found that the state only had to establish that the alerts occurred in order to find a violation, when the law requires the state to establish that the violations were willful and substantial. Reversed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Florida Courts Of Appeal
CIVIL PROCEDURE, BANKING/LENDING
Spacebox Dover, LLC v. LSREF2 Baron LLC, May-10-2013
J. Northcutt finds that the circuit court should have granted appellant's motion to stay a Florida foreclosure action pending the resolution of a Mississippi action on the underlying promissory note. The Mississippi court first acquired jurisdiction, and resolution of that action will resolve many of the issues in the Florida foreclosure action. The court did not find any special circumstances that would justify denying a stay, such as undue delay by the first court.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Florida Courts Of Appeal
CIVIL PROCEDURE
Nascarella v. Belmont Wine Exchange, May-10-2013
J. Villanti reverses the appeal from an order amending a final default judgment, in view of this court's earlier affirmance of an order vacating the default final judgment.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Florida Courts Of Appeal
INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE, WITNESS
McClellan v. Florida, May-10-2013
J. Sleet finds that the postconviction court improperly denied appellant's claim that counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to call his employer to testify that metal beams he was accused of stealing in fact had been retrieved from a demolition job in the course of his employment. Since appellant was the only witness for the defense, his credibility was crucial, and his employer could have corroborated his testimony and kindled reasonable doubt in the minds of the jurors. Reversed in part.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Florida Courts Of Appeal
MURDER, SELF DEFENSE, JURY
Miller v. Florida, May-10-2013
Per curiam, the court of appeal finds that the lower court at appellant's trial for first-degree murder gave the jury a misleading instruction regarding the duty to retreat. However, the error was harmless in light of the testimony and the physical evidence presented at trial, which established that appellant shot the victim four times while in the back of a parked van. Affirmed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Illinois Appellate Court
NEGLIGENCE
Shatku v. Wal-Mart Stores, May-10-2013
J. Jorgensen holds that the lower court need not reconsider its denial of plaintiff's motion to refile her negligence action against Wal-Mart. The lower court entered a final judgment on Dec. 22, 2011. Under Illinois Supreme Court Rule 303(a)(1), only a timely motion directed against the judgment extends the time in which to file a notice of appeal. Plaintiff's motion to reconsider was filed three days late. Affirmed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Illinois Appellate Court
ATTORNEYS
People v. Jackson, May-10-2013
J. McDade holds that defendant's counsel was properly disqualified in proceedings for concealing or aiding a fugitive. Counsel also represented the person defendant was charged with harboring, as well as an individual that was charged in a related case. Counsel's prior representation of the two related individuals created the serious potential for a conflict of interest, as his loyalty would remain in question. Affirmed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Illinois Appellate Court
BANKING/LENDING, CIVIL PROCEDURE
A.J. Smith Federal Savings Bank v. Sabuco, May-10-2013
J. Lytton finds that defendant cannot appeal the lower court's denial of his motion for release in a foreclosure action, which plaintiff filed after defendant did not make payments on the mortgage loan. The validity of the underlying judgment will not be finally decided until a wage deduction hearing. The trial court's order denying defendant's motion for accord and satisfaction is interlocutory and not appealable.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Illinois Appellate Court
CONSTRUCTION
J.S. Reimer v. Village of Orland Hills, May-10-2013
J. Taylor holds that plaintiff's claims against defendant Jack Barclay & Associates for negligent design, management and construction supervision of plaintiff's community center is barred by a four-year statute of limitations. Defendant finished construction in 2001. Testimony showed that problems with the floor first manifested in 2001 and 2002. Plaintiff filed suit in 2006. Affirmed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Illinois Appellate Court
WILLS / PROBATE
In re Estate of Mosquera v. , May-10-2013
J. Palmer holds that petitioner may be entitled to a child's award as a dependent adult against the decedent's estate. Petitioner was not declared dependent until he was an adult, and was an adult when the decedent passed away. However, the relevant issue is whether petitioner was unable to maintain himself and is likely to become a public charge. An evidentiary hearing must be held to determine "a sum of money that the court deems reasonable for the proper support of the child for the period of nine months after the death of the decedent, in a manner suited to the condition in life of the minor child and to the condition of the estate." Reversed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Indiana Court Of Appeals
DRUG OFFENDER, EVIDENCE
State v. Cobbs, May-10-2013
J. Barnes finds that the trial court properly admitted the testimony of a confidential informant. Even without the testimony, there was sufficient evidence to convict defendant of dealing in cocaine. Affirmed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Indiana Court Of Appeals
BATTERY, RESTITUTION
State v. Alexander, May-10-2013
J. Pyle finds that defendant's appeal of his conviction for aggravated battery should be dismissed. There was nothing in the record to indicate that the trial court has ever entered a restitution order.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Indiana Court Of Appeals
DRUG OFFENDER, PLEA, INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE
State v. Barajas, May-10-2013
J. Vaidik finds that the post-conviction court properly denied defendant post-conviction relief. Since defendant was told that his guilty plea to felony cocaine possession could result in deportation, no analysis is necessary of whether competent representation would have caused defendant not to enter a plea. Affirmed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Iowa Supreme Court
ATTORNEYS, SANCTIONS
Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board v. Stowe, May-10-2013
J. Wiggins finds that Des Moines attorney, Brian Stowe, should have his license to practice law revoked. Stowe stole two checks from a client, forged the client's signatures, and cashed each for $200 in his account. He was also convicted of possessing methamphetamine and participated in unauthorized practice of law after he was placed on disability suspension because of his drug addiction.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Iowa Supreme Court
WORKERS COMPENSATION, ARBITRATION, DAMAGES
Coffey v. Mid Seven Transportation Co., May-10-2013
J. Wiggins finds that a driver who's leg and foot was run over by an 18-wheel tractor-trailer may be entitled to additional workers' compensation benefits. Petitioner sought to reopen his workers' compensation claim so he could be reimbursed for additional post-arbitration medical expenses. Petitioner, who worked part-time as a substitute school bus driver after the accident, receives social security disability and workers compensation benefits, and settled a third-party claim relating to the accident for $275,000. Based on petitioner's additional claims for reimbursement, the workers' compensation administrator should determine amount of money owed to plaintiff and determine what credit is due to his former employer and its insurer. Vacated.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Iowa Supreme Court
EMPLOYMENT, JURISDICTION, CIVIL PROCEDURE
Rivera v. Woodward Resource Center, May-10-2013
J. Cady finds that the former employee of a government-administered home for the disabled can continue her wrongful discharge lawsuit. Plaintiff's original complaint, filed within the statute of limitations, was dismissed for failing to exhaust administrative remedies. She filed a second action within six months of the first dismissal, but more than two years after the claim accrued. A claim is made or filed "under any other law of this state" even when it is pursued without following the required procedural steps. Plaintiff's lawsuit satisfied the savings claim of the statute of limitation of the Iowa Tort Claims Act, so her suit was timely filed. Reversed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Kansas Courts Of Appeal
INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE, DRUG OFFENDER, IMMIGRATION
State v. Sarabia-Flores, May-10-2013
J. Standridge finds that the lower court properly refused to allow defendant to withdraw his guilty plea to misdemeanor drug paraphernalia charges, which was based on the claim that his counsel failed to advise him of potential immigration consequences arising from his plea. Defendant's conviction became final before the Supreme Court precedent prohibiting such conduct by counsel was decided. Affirmed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Kansas Supreme Court
CHILD ABUSE, SEX OFFENDER, SENTENCING
State v. Randolph, May-10-2013
J. Luckert finds that the lower court properly convicted defendant of rape of a child under the age of 14. The definition of "sexual intercourse" in the statute does not create alternative means simply because it states three types of penetration. Also, the court properly admitted defendant's incriminating statements to police because the statements were voluntarily made under the deferential "substantial competent evidence" standard. The statement was freely and voluntarily given. However, defendant's sentence must be vacated because defendant was eligible for parole, and lifetime postrelease supervision does not apply. There is no need to consider whether a lifetime sentence is cruel and unusual since defendant will receive a new sentence. Affirmed in part.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Kansas Supreme Court
DUI, WITNESS, EVIDENCE
State v. Huffmier, May-10-2013
J. Biles finds that the lower court properly convicted defendant of DUI. The evidence was sufficient to show that defendant was intoxicated, based on field sobriety tests, even though she did not take or fail a breath test. Testimony as to her visiting arrangements with her children was not intended to unfairly paint her in a bad light, but to show why she may have been driving at the time. Her ex-husband's testimony improperly put her character in a bad light, but the court gave a sufficient curative instruction. Defendant's other objections have been waived since she did not raise them below. Affirmed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Kansas Supreme Court
MURDER, SEX OFFENDER, PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT
State v. Mireles, May-10-2013
J. Rosen finds that the lower court properly convicted defendant of capital murder and rape and properly sentenced him to a life sentence without the possibility of parole. Although the photographic evidence was gruesome, it was not cumulative or unfairly inflammatory given its relevance to the state's case. By allowing the prosecution to submit this evidence, the court did not wrongly relieve it of its burden of proving the elements of the crime, even though defendant conceded the cause of death. Similarly, autopsy photographs that assist a pathologist in explaining the cause of death are relevant and admissible. Also, although a prosecutor must not state a personal opinion as to defendant's guilt, she may argue that the evidence demonstrates guilt. Affirmed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Kentucky Court Of Appeals
FAMILY LAW
Bailey v. Bailey, May-10-2013
J. Lambert finds that the family court properly allowed the wife to alter the marital dissolution. The husband failed to produce documentation of his retirement benefits, a portion of which the wife is entitled to after he turns 62. Affirmed in part.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Kentucky Court Of Appeals
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Kentucky v. Davis, May-10-2013
J. Moore finds that the circuit court improperly expunged defendant's arrest for wanton endangerment from his record. He was accused of damaging a railroad track with his semi truck and causing a derailment. Although the court dismissed the charges, a civil claim is pending, so the record should not yet be expunged. Reversed.
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Massachusetts Supreme Court
JUDICIARY, SANCTIONS
In the Matter of Clerk-Magistrate Powers v. , May-10-2013
J. Gants holds that Clerk-Magistrate Robert Powers should be removed from his position for violating multiple Canons of the Code of Professional Responsibility for Clerks of the Courts. Powers was often one to two hours late, and thus did not contribute to the work of the Clerk's office. Powers also "willfully, grossly, and continuously failed to maintain order and decorum in proceedings he presided over and to be patient, dignified, and courteous to litigants, lawyers, staff, judges and others in his official dealings," thus creating "the perception in the community that the Barnstable District Court is not a place to go to be treated fairly and to receive orderly administration of justice."
|
| Edit |
Delete |
Massachusetts Supreme Court
ATTORNEYS, LICENSING
Schomer v. Board of Bar Examiners, May-10-2013
J. Spina finds that the Board of Bar Examiners should reconsider Jesse Daniel Schomer's petition for admission to the bar. Schomer met the requirement of S.J.C. Rule 3:01, Section 6.1.1, mandating engagement in the active practice of law for at least five of the seven years before filing his petition for admission to the Massachusetts bar. Schomer, who is licensed in New Jersey, worked as a contract attorney in New York for four years and was admitted to the New York bar in 2009. He has worked as an attorney in either New York or New Jersey ever since.
|