|
|
|
Court rejects cat hoarders' appeal of convictions
Legal Watch |
2013/07/08 18:08
|
The Montana Supreme Court has denied the appeal of a northwestern Montana couple's conviction of aggravated cruelty to animals after 116 cats were found living in filthy, snowbound trailers.
The Daily Inter Lake reports the court announced the decision July 2 involving Edwin and Cheryl Criswell.
The cats were found in December 2010 and a jury the following year found the couple guilty. In October 2011 Cheryl Criswell received a two-year sentence deferred over six years. Edwin Criswell received a two-year suspended sentence but later violated his probation by testing positive for marijuana and methamphetamine. In January he was sentenced to two years in prison.
In September 2006, the Criswells entered Alford pleas to 10 counts of misdemeanor animal cruelty in northern Idaho in what officials then called the largest animal hoarding case in state history involving 430 animals.
In the Montana case, the Criswells contended they were wrongly convicted because during the trial Flathead County Deputy Attorney Ken Park called them "professional freeloaders," prejudicing the jury. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Battle between SC Episcopalians back state court
Legal Watch |
2013/06/11 16:05
|
The legal fight between two factions of South Carolina Episcopalians will be decided in state court.
U.S. District Judge C. Weston Houck has issued an order saying the federal court has no jurisdiction and hearing the case would disrupt the balance between state and federal courts. Houck heard arguments in the dispute last week.
The conservative Diocese of South Carolina last year separated from the more liberal national Episcopal Church. The break-away churches then sued in state court to protect the use of the name and a half billion dollars' worth of property.
Parishes remaining with the national church then sued in federal court saying the case raised First Amendment and other federal issues.
But Houck disagreed and late Monday sent the case back to state court. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court: Police can take DNA swabs from arrestees
Legal Watch |
2013/06/03 21:09
|
A sharply divided Supreme Court on Monday said police can routinely take DNA from people they arrest, equating a DNA cheek swab to other common jailhouse procedures like fingerprinting.
"Taking and analyzing a cheek swab of the arrestee DNA is, like fingerprinting and photographing, a legitimate police booking procedure that is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment," Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the court's five-justice majority.
But the four dissenting justices said that the court was allowing a major change in police powers.
"Make no mistake about it: because of today's decision, your DNA can be taken and entered into a national database if you are ever arrested, rightly or wrongly, and for whatever reason," conservative Justice Antonin Scalia said in a sharp dissent which he read aloud in the courtroom.
At least 28 states and the federal government now take DNA swabs after arrests. But a Maryland court was one of the first to say that it was illegal for that state to take Alonzo King's DNA without approval from a judge, saying King had "a sufficiently weighty and reasonable expectation of privacy against warrantless, suspicionless searches."
But the high court's decision reverses that ruling and reinstates King's rape conviction, which came after police took his DNA during an unrelated arrest. Kennedy wrote the decision, and was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Stephen Breyer. Scalia was joined in his dissent by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court denies reporter's bid for AIG reports
Legal Watch |
2013/02/01 23:14
|
An appeals court has turned down a reporter's effort to see an independent consultant's reports for American International Group, Inc.
A district court had granted the request from Sue Reisinger, a reporter for Corporate Counsel and American Lawyer magazines. The district court concluded the reports were judicial records, to which Reisinger had a common law right of access.
But a three-judge appeals court panel reversed the ruling Friday.
AIG hired the consultant as part of a court-approved consent decree with the Securities and Exchange Commission to settle 2004 allegations of securities violations by the giant insurer.
The appellate judges, all appointed by Republican presidents, concluded the reports were not judicial records subject to release because the lower court in handling the settlement made no decisions about or based on them. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lohan lawyer in NYC courthouse in nightclub case
Legal Watch |
2013/01/10 03:56
|
Lindsay Lohan's attorney has gone to a New York City courthouse in connection with the actress's alleged fight at a Manhattan nightclub.
Lohan was arrested on a charge of misdemeanor assault in the Nov. 29 incident at the club Avenue.
Office of Court Administration spokesman David Bookstaver said Monday that a criminal complaint has not been drawn up at this time. He says paperwork will be signed but no hearing will be held.
The "Mean Girls" and "Liz and Dick" star allegedly struck a woman in the face during an argument.
At the time of her arrest, her attorney, Mark Heller, said Lohan was "a victim of someone trying to capture their 15 minutes of fame." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
NY court: Lap dances are not art and are taxable
Legal Watch |
2012/10/27 21:07
|
Lap dances are taxable because they don't promote culture in a community the way ballet or other artistic endeavors do, New York's highest court concluded Tuesday in a sharply divided ruling.
The court split 4-3, with the dissenting judges saying there's no distinction in state law between "highbrow dance and lowbrow dance," so the case raises "significant constitutional problems."
The lawsuit was filed by Nite Moves in suburban Albany, which was arguing fees for admission to the strip club and for private dances are exempt from sales taxes.
The court majority said taxes apply to many entertainment venues, such as amusement parks and sporting events. It ruled the club has failed to prove it qualifies for the exemption for "dramatic or musical arts performances" that was adopted by the Legislature "with the evident purpose of promoting cultural and artistic performances in local communities."
The majority reached similar conclusions about admission fees to watch dances done onstage around a pole, as well as for lap dances or private dances.
W. Anderson McCullough, attorney for the club, said he and his client were bitterly disappointed by the judges' ruling. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Feds seek full court review of cigarette warnings
Legal Watch |
2012/10/12 20:33
|
The U.S. government is asking a federal appeals court to rehear a challenge to a Food and Drug Administration requirement that tobacco companies to put large graphic health warnings on cigarette packages to show that smoking can disfigure and even kill people.
The Justice Department filed a petition Tuesday asking for the full court to rehear the case after a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington affirmed in August a lower court ruling blocking the mandate, saying it ran afoul of the First Amendment's free speech protections. However, the court rarely grants such appeals.
Some of the nation's largest tobacco companies, including R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., sued to block the mandate to include warnings to show the dangers of smoking and encouraging smokers to quit lighting up. They argued that the proposed warnings went beyond factual information into anti-smoking advocacy. The government argued the photos of dead and diseased smokers are factual. |
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
