|
|
|
Supreme Court denies appeal in arson case
Press Release |
2013/12/30 13:23
|
The Montana Supreme Court has denied a petition for post-conviction relief filed by a Billings man who argued that a District Court judge misinterpreted the state's arson law and that he had ineffective attorneys.
The Dec. 20 Supreme Court ruling left in place a five-year suspended sentence given to Lionel Scott Ellison in 2009 for an October 2007 fire that damaged a woman's car.
Ellison in 2008 entered a no-contest plea to arson on the advice of his attorney, Jeffrey Michael. Pleading no contest means a person admits no guilt for the crime, but the court can determine the punishment.
Ellison then changed his mind and his attorney, having Herbert "Chuck" Watson file a motion to withdraw the no-contest plea, contending Ellison didn't enter it knowingly or voluntarily. But a District Court judge rejected the request, and in May 2009 Ellison received a five-year suspended sentence.
He appealed the District Court's decision, and the Montana Supreme Court in November 2009 sided with the lower court.
In February 2011, Ellison filed for post-conviction relief, arguing the arson statute only applied to property valued at over $1,000. He said that because the damaged vehicle was worth less, there was no factual basis for his no-contest plea. He also argued that Michael and Watson provided ineffective counsel for allowing him to enter a plea for a charge that had an insufficient factual basis and that Watson didn't use those grounds on appeal. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Judge ousts defendant twice from Guantanamo court
Press Release |
2013/12/20 10:33
|
The military judge presiding over the Sept. 11 war crimes tribunal at Guantanamo ejected one defendant from the courtroom twice Tuesday for speaking out of turn, adding a bit of drama to an otherwise dry pretrial motions hearing at the U.S. naval base in Cuba.
Ramzi Binalshibh, one of five Guantanamo prisoners charged with orchestrating the Sept. 11 terrorist attack, refused repeated warnings to stop trying to address the judge about what he claims are efforts by guards to keep him awake at night with banging sounds inside his cell.
But the judge, whose courtroom was repeatedly disrupted when the defendants were arraigned in May 2012, was having none of it. Army Col. James Pohl ordered troops to remove Binalshibh and place him in a holding cell.
Then the same scene repeated itself in the afternoon session, and the judge warned it would happen again if the defendant tried again on Wednesday. "If he is disruptive he will be escorted from the courtroom," Pohl told the lawyers for Binalshibh.
He also said he was concerned that the prisoner might shout out classified information, prompting courtroom censors to cut the sound. "I don't know what he'll say," he said.
Both removals occurred as the judge asked Binalshibh if he understood he has the right to be absent from the remainder of the pretrial motions hearing this week. The four other defendants also answered in the affirmative.
Binalshibh used the question as an opportunity to repeat claims that prison authorities use sounds and vibrations to keep him awake at night inside Camp 7, the high-security section of Guantanamo where he and the other defendants in the Sept. 11 case are held. Prosecutors say they have looked into the matter and were assured that no noises are being made. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hearing: Which court should hear coastal lawsuit?
Press Release |
2013/12/20 10:32
|
A legal tug-of-war continues in a state levee board's lawsuit against 97 oil, gas and pipeline companies over the erosion of wetlands.
The Southeast Louisiana Flood Protection Authority-East wants U.S. District Judge Nannette Jolivette Brown to send the case back to Orleans Parish Civil District Court, where the board filed it in July.
Attorneys for Chevron USA Inc. got the lawsuit moved to federal court in August, arguing that federal laws govern many of its claims.
Since then, lawyers have filed hundreds of pages of arguments and exhibits just on the question of which court should hear the case.
Brown scheduled arguments Wednesday.
The lawsuit says oil and gas canal and pipeline work has contributed to the erosion of wetlands that protect New Orleans when hurricanes move ashore. Corrosive saltwater from a network of oil and gas access and pipeline canals has killed plants that anchored the wetlands, letting waves sweep away hundreds of thousands of coastal land, it says.
Gov. Bobby Jindal has blasted the lawsuit as a windfall for trial lawyers and his coastal protection chief, Garret Graves, said the suit would undermine Louisiana's work with the industry to rebuild wetlands. An association of state levee districts voted to oppose the suit.
Since then, however, two coastal parishes heavily dependent on the industry have filed lawsuits of their own raising similar issues.
Earlier this month, the Louisiana Oil and Gas Association sued the state's attorney general, accusing him of illegally approving the Southeast Louisiana board's contract with lawyers who filed its lawsuit.
The association contends that Buddy Caldwell had no authority to approve the contract and that the suit will have "a chilling effect on the exploration, production, development and transportation" of Louisiana's oil and gas. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Haiti protest derides Dominican court ruling
Press Release |
2013/12/09 13:23
|
Hundreds of protesters gathered Friday to criticize a recent court decision in the Dominican Republic that could strip the citizenship of generations of people of Haitian descent living in the neighboring country.
The crowd peaked at about 2,000 people but thinned out during the march uphill to the Dominican Embassy to protest the decision passed two months ago by that country's court. The demonstrators urged people to boycott travel to the Dominican Republic.
Riot police set up metal barricades on a major thoroughfare that block protesters from reaching the district where the diplomatic mission is located.
The ruling has been met with sharp objection, from Caribbean leaders to the United Nations. On Friday, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights became the latest international entity to oppose the court decision, calling on the Dominican government to take urgent measures to guarantee the rights of those people affected.
Advocacy groups estimate 200,000 people, many of them of Haitian descent, could lose their Dominican citizenship because of the court ruling. Dominican officials say only about 24,000 would be affected. |
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
