|
|
|
High court to consider drunken driving case
Court Watch News |
2012/09/27 11:00
|
The Supreme Court will decide when law enforcement officers must get a warrant before ordering a blood test on an unwilling drunken-driving suspect.
The issue has divided federal and state courts around the country and the justices on Tuesday agreed to take up a case involving a disputed blood test from Missouri.
In siding with the defendant in the case, the Missouri Supreme Court said police need a warrant to take a suspect's blood except in special circumstances when a delay could threaten a life or destroy potential evidence.
Other courts have ruled that dissipation of alcohol in the blood is reason enough for police to call for a blood test without first getting a warrant.
The Missouri case was one of six new cases accepted for argument in front of the Supreme Court. The new term begins Monday and the cases probably will be argued in January.
The American Civil Liberties Union, representing Tyler McNeely, said the arresting officer made no effort to obtain a warrant and didn't think he needed one, not that he feared a delay would lower the level of alcohol in McNeely's blood. The ACLU said the case was not a good one for resolving complex issues of science and law. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appeals court reverses ruling on campaign donors
Court Watch News |
2012/09/22 15:49
|
An appeals court on Tuesday reversed a lower court ruling that likely would have led to greater disclosure of who is paying for certain election ads.
In March, U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson ruled that the Federal Election Commission overstepped its bounds in allowing groups that fund certain election ads to keep their financiers anonymous.
But Tuesday's unanimous ruling by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia sent the case back to Jackson, with instructions to refer the matter to the FEC for further consideration.
At issue are electioneering communications — ads that don't expressly advocate voting for or against a candidate running for federal office. In 2007, the FEC ruled that only contributors whose donations were "made for the purpose of furthering electioneering communications" had to be identified; those who gave unrestricted money did not have to be identified. The FEC regulation came in response to a Supreme Court ruling that gave more latitude to nonprofit groups — like the Karl Rove-backed Crossroads GPS and the President Barack Obama-leaning Priorities USA — on pre-election ads.
Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., sued the FEC over the regulation, which he called a "loophole" that made the disclosure requirements meaningless. He won a summary judgment from Jackson, who was appointed by Obama. The judge ruled that "Congress spoke plainly" in passing the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law — and did not delegate authority to the FEC to narrow the disclosure requirement. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
California deputy pleads guilty to weapons charge
Court Watch News |
2012/08/29 10:29
|
A former Sacramento County sheriff's deputy has pleaded guilty to a federal charge stemming from the illegal sale of dozens of weapons, some of which were used by criminals.
Prosecutors in Sacramento say Thomas Lu and fellow former deputy Ryan McGowan, both of Elk Grove, bought and sold handguns that cannot be legally owned by citizens in California.
Lu, age 42, pleaded guilty Tuesday in federal court to one count of dealing in firearms without a license, which carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison.
He is agreeing to cooperate with investigators as part of a deal that could bring him a lighter sentence.
The deputies are charged with serving as straw buyers who trafficked in restricted handguns. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Man who killed wife, baby loses appeal in Mass.
Court Watch News |
2012/08/15 10:47
|
The highest court in Massachusetts rejected the appeal of a British man convicted of killing his wife and baby daughter in their rented home, saying in its decision released Tuesday that warrantless searches of the home were justified because those inside might have been in danger.
In arguing for a new trial, lawyers for Neil Entwistle said evidence obtained during the warrantless searches of the Hopkinton home while police were looking for the missing family should have been dismissed at trial.
They also argued he was denied a fair trial, claiming that "saturating and inflammatory" media coverage tainted the jury pool and the judge refused to question prospective jurors more deeply about how publicity may have biased them.
The court rejected the arguments, concluding that Entwistle "received a fair trial that was ably tried and judged."
Entwistle was convicted of the 2006 shootings of his wife, Rachel, and their daughter, 9-month-old Lillian. He is serving life in prison without the possibility of parole for their murders. |
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
