No. 1,315 Since I discovered Judge Kopf’s post yesterday, (see post below) I added Mimesis to my regular reading list. I found this thoughtful analysis of a one year prison sentence for the killer of a puppy. I suppose we should feel conflicted about prison sentences for even the most extreme cases of animal cruelty. […]
No. 1,314 I knew it couldn’t last. Judge Richard Kopf, a Senior United States District Judge in Nebraska, is blogging again. He shut down his long-time site,Hercules and the Umpire, a couple of years ago because court employees stated in a poll that they thought that the blog reflected poorly on the reputation of the […]
Enhanced Penalty for Refusing Blood Sample in DUI Arrest in Pa. is illegal following Birchfield v North Dakota.
No. 1,309 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. MARIO GIRON, SUPERIOR COURT, NO. 1300 EDA 2016, FILED JANUARY 31, 2017 “Appellant, Mario Giron, appeals from the judgment of sentence entered on April 15, 2016. In this case, we hold that, pursuant to Birchfield v. North Dakota, 136 S.Ct. 2160 (2016), a defendant who refuses to provide a blood sample when […]
No. 1,260 Carbon Monoxide Alarm Standards Act 35 P.S. § 7221 – 7227 (Current through 12/18/2013) (When referring to section numbers, use the last digit of each section. For example, 25 P.S. §7222 might be referred to as Section 2 of the Act) TABLE OF CONTENTS Short title Definitions Administration Carbon monoxide alarm requirements […]
No. 1,234 Summary: Don’t expect privacy anywhere. The ABA Journal Blog reports that the Feds were bugging the area around the front steps of a courthouse. It seems that lawyers would tell their clients to wait until after leaving the courthouse to talk about their case. So, they would stand and talk just outside the […]
No. 1,201 Here’s a very interesting article from Jurist, the Pitt Law School publication that follows legal news around the world. The Justice Department is attacking a Boise City ordinance that prohibits slewing in public. Since everybody has to sleep, it is argued, this makes it a crime to be homeless. The article gives a […]
“Did Superior Court err by suppressing a confession that respondent gave after receiving Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1964), warnings because, six days prior to any police questioning, while in custody in another jurisdiction, he had signed a form anticipatorily declining to be interviewed?”
The other day I answered a question on AVVO Answers. This individual had had a big fight with his sister and she had “disowned” him. He wanted to know if he could keep the property she had stored in his attic. After all, he said, possession is 9/10 of the law.
The question is, does this constitute illegal gambling? In Pennsylvania, probably not.
The central issue at trial was whether the defendants committed the assaults “because of” the religion of the victims. 18 U.S.C. § 249(a)(2)(A). In instructing the jury on this point, the district court rejected the defendants’ proposed instruction (that the faith of the victims must be a “but for” cause of the assaults) and adopted the government’s proposed instruction (that the faith of the victims must be a “significant factor” in motivating the assaults). Regrettably for all concerned, a case decided after this trial confirms that the court should have given a but-for instruction on causation in the context of this criminal trial. Burrage v. United States, 134 S. Ct. 881, 887–89 (2014). Because this error was not harmless, and indeed went to the central factual debate at trial, we must reverse these convictions. ”keep looking »