|
|
|
Minister tells court marijuana is a sacrament
Breaking Legal News |
2007/07/26 06:29
|
The mail-order minister of a Hollywood church that burns marijuana during services and allegedly sells it to members says that’s protected under federal law because the drug is a religious sacrament. But Judge Mary Strobel has ruled that the Reverend Craig X. Rubin can’t use federal law as a defense because he faces only state charges. Rubin, who’s representing himself at his drug trial, says members of his Temple 420 believe that marijuana is the tree of life mentioned in the Bible. Though ordained in 1990 by the Universal Life Church, police and prosecutors describe Rubin as a drug dealer. He faces up to seven years in prison if convicted of possessing marijuana for sale. The 41-year-old Rubin has no legal experience, and says he spent last weekend praying and smoking marijuana with Indians in a sweat lodge at the bottom of the Grand Canyon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CA Man Charged With Obscenity Violations
Breaking Legal News |
2007/07/25 11:31
|
A California man has been charged by a federal grand jury in Los Angeles with operating an Internet-based obscenity distribution business and related offenses, Assistant Attorney General Alice S. Fisher of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and U.S. Attorney George Cardona of the Central District of California announced today. The indictment returned yesterday charges Ira Isaacs, doing business as Stolen Car Films and LA Media, with four counts of using an interactive computer service to sell and distribute obscene films on DVD, two counts of using a common carrier to distribute obscene DVDs, and two counts of failing to label sexually explicit DVDs with the name and location of the custodian of records containing age and identification information for performers in sexually explicit films. The maximum penalty is five years in prison on each count. The court will issue a summons directing Isaacs, who is believed to reside in the Hollywood Hills, to appear in United States District Court in Los Angeles for arraignment in August. The indictment also seeks the forfeiture of all obscene materials produced and transported by Isaacs and any proceeds derived from the sale of such materials. The charges contained in the indictment are merely accusations, and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty. The case is being prosecuted by Trial Attorney Kenneth Whitted of the Justice Department’s Obscenity Prosecution Task Force and Assistant U.S. Attorney Craig Missakian of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California. The Task Force was formed to focus on the prosecution of adult obscenity nationwide. The investigation was conducted by the FBI’s Adult Obscenity Squad, a national initiative of the FBI based in the Washington, D.C. Field Office, and agents from the FBI’s Los Angeles Field Office. |
|
|
|
|
|
Court Strikes Down Longer Hours for Truckers
Breaking Legal News |
2007/07/25 06:58
|
A federal appeals court on Tuesday struck down a Bush administration rule that loosened the work hours of truck drivers after concluding that officials had failed to justify the changes adequately. In a unanimous decision, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said that the federal agency that oversees the truck industry did not provide enough evidence to demonstrate the safety of its 2005 decision to increase the maximum driving hours of truck drivers. The hours of service were increased to 77 from 60 over 7 consecutive days, and to 88 hours from 70 over 8 days. The court found that the agency, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, a unit of the Department of Transportation, had ignored the results of a database it commissioned to catalog more than 50,000 truck accidents from 1991 to 2002. Using the data, the study extrapolated that the risk of fatigue-related accidents would be substantially higher in the extra hours of service allowed by the new rules. “F.M.C.S.A. failed to provide an adequate explanation for its decision to adopt the 11-hour daily driving limit,” the court said. The new rules had been adopted after heavy lobbying by politically connected leaders of the trucking industry. The changes were part of the broader strategy by the Bush administration to reduce regulations on businesses. Safety experts and insurance analysts challenged the changes. They said longer driving hours have contributed to the high number of truck accidents. About 100 people die each week in truck-related accidents, making trucking America’s most treacherous industry as measured by overall deaths and injuries. Supporters of the loosened standards say they have made it faster and cheaper to move goods across the country. They say the changes promote safety because shorter hours would force the industry to put more drivers with little experience behind the wheel. And they note that the fatality rate, or the number of deaths per miles traveled, has continued a long decline. Still, the fatality rate for truck-related accidents remains nearly double that involving only cars. And the Bush administration has repeatedly missed its own targets for reducing the number of fatalities from truck accidents. The decision today came in a case filed by Public Citizen, a consumer advocacy group. It was the third time in three years that the courts have been critical of the motor carrier agency. A different appeals panel criticized the agency in December 2005 for failing to issue adequate rules for the training of drivers, saying the agency had ignored its own studies on the need for more comprehensive training. And in 2004, a third panel of the appeals court struck down virtually identical new hours of service rules as the ones at issue in Tuesday’s decision, saying that they had been “arbitrary and capricious.” After Congress, at the urging of the Bush administration and the trucking industry, intervened to block the enforcement of the 2004 court order, the motor carrier agency issued the 2005 rules. At the time, the agency said it had addressed the concerns raised by the appeals court’s 2004 decision. In a regulatory impact analysis accompanying the 2005 changes, the agency concluded that the economic costs to the industry of tightening the hours of service rules, as consumer groups had proposed, outweighed the safety benefits. But the court said today that analysis was flawed. The opinion was written by Judge Merrick B. Garland and signed by Chief Judge Douglas H. Ginsburg and Judge Karen Lecraft Henderson. Safety groups hailed Tuesday’s ruling and said the court had confirmed their view that the agency had failed to adequately justify relaxing the rules. “The court is saying once again, no,” said Jacqueline S. Gillan, vice president of Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, an alliance of consumer, health and insurance organizations. “For three and a half years this agency has tried every which way to defend a rule that would result in longer consecutive driver hours and longer total work hours. This has a dramatic dangerous impact on the lives of truck drivers and on the lives of everyone sharing the roads with trucks. And once again the court has said, ‘No, you cannot go ahead with a rule when it violates the law and you clearly have not justified it.’ ” The agency would not say whether it would appeal the decision or seek a stay of the court’s order, which is set to go into effect in September. “We are analyzing the decision issued today to understand the court’s findings as well as determine the agency’s next steps to prevent driver fatigue, ensure safe and efficient motor carrier operations and save lives,” said a statement issued by the agency. The American Trucking Associations, which defended the changes to the rules in the proceeding, said they would ask the court to stay its ruling to give the agency time to provide a better justification of the changes. |
|
|
|
|
|
Ex-Newark Mayor Pleads Not Guilty to Corruption
Breaking Legal News |
2007/07/24 08:48
|
At his arraignment in federal court Monday, former Mayor Sharpe James pleaded not guilty to corruption charges and then listened as one of his lawyers defended himself against allegations that it would be a conflict of interest if he remained part of Mr. James’s defense team. Prosecutors told Judge William J. Martini of United States District Court that the lawyer, Thomas R. Ashley, had represented two other people involved in the case against Mr. James and his companion, Tamika Riley. Mr. James is accused of charging more than $58,000 in personal expenses on city-issued credit cards during his two decades as mayor and of selling city land at below market rates to Ms. Riley, who the authorities said then resold the property at an enormous profit. Judith Germano, an assistant United States attorney, told Judge Martini that Mr. Ashley represented someone referred to in the criminal complaint as “Individual 1.” The person, who is not named in the indictment but who is “close to both defendants James and Riley,” lent $10,000 to Ms. Riley to help her pay for several properties in Newark and later received checks from Ms. Riley, according to prosecutors. Ms. Germano said the other person Mr. Ashley represented was “an attorney in a number of real estate transactions” that are part of the case. In response, Mr. Ashley said, “I don’t see that there’s a conflict.” The judge told Ms. Germano to submit a brief with her concerns. During the hourlong court appearance, Mr. James, 71, wearing a dark blue suit, smiled and seemed relaxed, limiting himself before and after the hearing to a single, repeated comment to reporters: “God is good all the time.” He and Ms. Riley, 38, who also pleaded not guilty, waived their right to a speedy trial. Ms. Riley, whose relatives sat in the small, packed gallery, looked more anxious than Mr. James. She wore a black suit, flipped through legal papers, and did not smile. Prosecutors said the evidence against Mr. James and Ms. Riley was largely contained in 40 banker’s boxes, each holding roughly 200 documents. Perry Primavera, a special assistant United States attorney, said that the prosecution would call about 60 witnesses, and that the trial would last about 12 weeks. The trial is tentatively set to begin in early February. Mr. Ashley, a well-known criminal defense lawyer here, once represented Mr. James’s chief of staff, Jackie R. Mattison, who was found guilty in 1997 of taking bribes. After Monday’s court hearing, Mr. Ashley said of the prosecutors: “I didn’t know they were going to try to have me removed. I anticipated it could be an issue. They were never too happy with my representation.” In court, Ms. Germano said that Mr. Ashley himself could be called as a witness in the case, to give evidence about a personal trip Mr. James and his companions made to Martha’s Vineyard in 2003, which prosecutors said cost the city of Newark more than $3,500. |
|
|
|
|
|
Court grants evidence to Guantanamo lawyers
Breaking Legal News |
2007/07/21 11:53
|
A federal appeals court on Friday ruled lawyers for Guantanamo prisoners should have access to nearly all government evidence so they can challenge detainees' designation as "unlawful enemy combatants." The unanimous ruling by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington was a blow to the Bush administration's attempt to limit the lawyers' access to only the evidence presented to a U.S. military tribunal that made the determinations. The ruling came on the same day President George W. Bush ordered the CIA to comply with Geneva Conventions against torture in dealing with detainees held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba and secret CIA prisons elsewhere. "Contrary to the position of the government, the record on review consists of all the information a tribunal is authorized to obtain and consider," the court ruling stated. The court also ruled that detainees' lawyers should have access to classified information relating to clients' cases. "Certain highly sensitive information" may be withheld from the lawyers, but not from the court, the judges ruled. Lawyers for the detainees argued in mid-May that being able to review all documents compiled by the U.S. government, not just those presented to the military tribunal, could help them clear the detainees, some of whom have been jailed for more than five years. There are about 385 detainees at Guantanamo, which was set up to handle prisoners captured by the United States following the September 11 attacks. U.S. government attorneys have argued that any evidence that could help clear prisoners would have been turned over to the military tribunal that made the "unlawful enemy combatant" determination. In rejecting that argument, the court ruled that an adequate review of the tribunal's determination cannot be made "without seeing all the evidence, any more than one can tell whether a fraction is more or less than one-half by looking only at the numerator and not at the denominator." The court also rejected the government's position that lawyers should only have one eight-hour visit to Guantanamo to obtain approval from a prisoner to represent him.
The judges said a second visit would allow the lawyer "time to earn the detainee's trust." Democrats in Congress are considering legislation calling for closing the Guantanamo prison, arguing indefinite detentions and allegations of prisoner mistreatment, which the military denies, is hurting the United States' reputation abroad and stoking potential acts of terrorism. |
|
|
|
|
|
Ga. top court finishes hearing Wilson's appeal
Breaking Legal News |
2007/07/21 10:55
|
The Georgia Supreme Court heard arguments Friday morning on a pair of appeals in the closely watched Genarlow Wilson case, though no ruling was expected immediately. The courtroom was packed for the hearing, and arguments were broadcast live over the Internet. The hearing came after justices decided earlier this month to speed up the process in the case of Wilson, the Douglas County man imprisoned for receiving oral sex from a 15-year-old girl when he was 17. Wilson's attorneys argue his 10-year prison sentence is cruel and unusual punishment. The justices are considering two appeals in the case. Georgia Attorney General Thurbert Baker is appealing a Monroe County Superior Court judge's decision to reduce Wilson's felony conviction to a misdemeanor and free him from prison. Baker said the judge overstepped his authority when he granted Wilson's motion last month. Following the Monroe County judge's decision, Wilson's attorneys requested he be released on bond pending Baker's appeal, but on June 27, the trial court in Douglas County denied the request. Wilson's attorneys have appealed that decision. B.J. Bernstein, Wilson's attorney, addressed the bond issue first at Friday's hearing, arguing for 10 minutes that her client should be granted bond while his case is under appeal. "Every day that a defendant spends in jail is a precious day in their life," Bernstein told the justices. Bernstein said that in the past 10 days, "two clients of mine died in prison." Bernstein argued that the trial court, in refusing bond, improperly applied the criminal appeal bond statute when it should have applied the habeas bond statute, since the Monroe County judge had ruled on a writ of habeas corpus, determining that Wilson had the right to make a claim of cruel and unusual punishment. However, Douglas County District Attorney David McDade, the original prosecutor on Wilson's case, countered in his time before the justices that state law is clear that "no appeal bond shall be granted to any person who is convicted of a list of crimes, and aggravated child molestation is included in that list." "It's not vague. It's not gray. It's not subject to interpretation," McDade said. "It is the plain letter of the law that applies in this case." In its appeal of the reduction of the felony conviction to a misdemeanor, the state has argued that the ruling could open the door for many other sexual criminals to have their sentences reduced. Wilson's attorneys argued that such fears are invalid and do not justify maintaining such a harsh sentence for consensual teen sex. Video cameras and still photographers lined the walls well before the arguments began. Outside, satellite trucks and Georgia State Patrol cars were parked all along the street, and security was high. Officers were posted all around the building and on the floor where the Supreme Court meets. Former state Rep. Matthew Towery, the author of the 1995 law Wilson was charged with violating, submitted a friend of the court brief supporting his release. "The General Assembly never intended for the Child Protection Act's harsh felony sentences designed to punish adults who prey on children to be used to punish consensual sexual acts between teenagers close in age," Towery's brief said. The state Legislature in 2006 changed the law, making oral sex between teens close in age a misdemeanor. The state Court of Appeals ruled that the new lasaveClicked(kSaveBtn,null,true)w could not be applied retroactively and the state Supreme Court upheld that ruling. Bernstein argued in her legal brief that the move by state lawmakers to change the law marked a "tectonic shift in how Georgia views voluntary consensual teen sex and its punishment." "The new reality is that teen sexual experimentation is commonplace in an era where the media bombards teens with sexual imagery," she wrote. Bernstein said it is extremely rare in Georgia for lawmakers to pass legislation softening punishment, especially for an emotionally charged crime like child molestation. But the state countered that it is well established that criminals are subject to the penalty that is in place when they violate the law. To begin to apply legislative changes retroactively would invite chaos and have a far-reaching effect throughout the criminal justice system, Baker argued. "The decision in this case not only affects Petitioner, but it potentially affects countless others who may be in the prison system or on probation or who have completed their sentences," he wrote. |
|
|
|
|
|
Court Gags Broadway Beast Actor's Lawyer
Breaking Legal News |
2007/07/20 01:04
|
A lawyer for a Broadway actor accused of having sexual contact with a 15-year-old girl may not publicize the teen's name in an effort to learn whether she has falsely accused anyone of molesting her, an appeals court ruled Thursday. The appeals court rejected the attempt by lawyer Ronald P. Fischetti to lift the limited gag order imposed on him by the judge who is overseeing the sex abuse case of actor James Barbour, who played the beast in Disney's "Beauty and the Beast." Fischetti told a lower court judge the district attorney's office set up a telephone hot line to receive calls about Barbour and he wanted to do something similar. "I want to put up a hot line with her (the victim's) name on it (and place it) in the newspapers," Fischetti said. "We believe that this alleged victim has made these false allegations before." The court upheld the judge's decision not to allow it, saying that Fischetti had shown no good faith basis for suggesting the girl had a history of falsely accusing anyone. It said that without such a showing, the policy interest of having sex crimes victims come forward without fear of exposure "outweighs what would amount to a fishing expedition." Barbour, 40, pleaded not guilty in December to charges of sexual abuse and criminal sex act against the girl, a fan and aspiring actress, in 2001. Barbour was starring in "Jane Eyre," and a high school drama teacher arranged for the girl and her parents to see the musical. The girl, now 20, went backstage alone after the show, and Barbour began touching her sexually, prosecutors said. |
|
|
|
|
Class action or a representative action is a form of lawsuit in which a large group of people collectively bring a claim to court and/or in which a class of defendants is being sued. This form of collective lawsuit originated in the United States and is still predominantly a U.S. phenomenon, at least the U.S. variant of it. In the United States federal courts, class actions are governed by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule. Since 1938, many states have adopted rules similar to the FRCP. However, some states like California have civil procedure systems which deviate significantly from the federal rules; the California Codes provide for four separate types of class actions. As a result, there are two separate treatises devoted solely to the complex topic of California class actions. Some states, such as Virginia, do not provide for any class actions, while others, such as New York, limit the types of claims that may be brought as class actions. They can construct your law firm a brand new website, lawyer website templates and help you redesign your existing law firm site to secure your place in the internet. |
Law Firm Directory
|
|