|
|
|
Ex-Gov. Blagojevich to ask Supreme Court to hear case
Court Line |
2015/08/20 20:33
|
A full appellate court indicated Wednesday that it will not rehear an appeal of Rod Blagojevich's corruption convictions, and his lawyer responded that the imprisoned former Illinois governor will appeal next to the U.S. Supreme Court.
After a three-judge panel tossed out five of his 18 convictions in July, Blagojevich had hoped the full court might overturn even more. But the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals posted a notice saying no judges on the court asked for a rehearing.
Blagojevich, 58, is serving a 14-year prison sentence at a federal prison in Colorado on convictions including his attempt to sell an appointment to President Barack Obama's old U.S. Senate seat.
An appeal to the nation's highest court is a last and seemingly slim hope for a major legal victory. The Supreme Court tends to accept cases that raise weighty issues and ones that federal courts disagree on.
But defense attorney Leonard Goodman said in a statement he believed the Supreme Court would agree Blagojevich was involved in legal, run-of-the-mill politicking.
Allowing the remaining convictions to stand "puts every public official who must raise campaign funds to stay in office and to be effective at the mercy of an ambitious or politically motivated federal prosecutor," he said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pistorius prosecutors file appeal at Supreme Court
Court Line |
2015/08/17 20:33
|
Prosecutors pushing for a murder conviction against Oscar Pistorius filed papers at South Africa's Supreme Court of Appeal on Monday, four days before the Olympic runner is expected to be released from prison and moved to house arrest.
Court registrar Paul Myburgh confirmed the prosecution's papers had been filed. Lawyers for the double-amputee runner have until Sept. 17 to file their response ahead of a hearing in November.
Prosecutors want a panel of judges at the Supreme Court to overrule a decision by another judge to acquit Pistorius of murder for killing girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp in 2013. Pistorius was instead found guilty of culpable homicide, or manslaughter, for shooting Steenkamp through a toilet cubicle door in his home.
He was sentenced to five years in jail, but is expected to be released from the Kgosi Mampuru II prison in the South African capital Pretoria on Friday after serving 10 months of that culpable homicide sentence.
Because of his good behavior, the 28-year-old Pistorius can be released on probation to serve the remainder under house arrest.
Prosecutors announced their intention to appeal Judge Thokozile Masipa's decision shortly after Pistorius' months-long trial last year. They said Masipa made an error in interpreting the law when she cleared Pistorius of murder and found him guilty instead of an unintentional but still unlawful killing.
Quoting a section of South African law known as "dolus eventualis," prosecutors argue in their appeal papers that the former track star should be convicted of murder because he shot through the toilet door in the pre-dawn hours of Valentine's Day two years ago, knowing that whoever was behind the door would likely be killed without just cause. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court: Lawsuit over Arkansas killing by cop may proceed
Court Line |
2015/08/07 07:05
|
A federal appeals court said Thursday the family of a 67-year-old man shot to death after two off-duty police officers entered his Little Rock apartment without a warrant or an invitation can move forward with a lawsuit.
Eugene Ellison died Dec. 9, 2010. His family alleges Officer Donna Lesher and Detective Tabitha McCrillis, working as private security guards, unlawfully entered his home and that Lesher improperly used deadly force following an argument and scuffle.
Prosecutors declined to press charges, saying the officers' attempts to use non-lethal means to subdue Ellison had failed. The women remain on the force.
Thursday's decision by the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis did not address the merits of the case, only whether the officers could be sued along with the apartment complex that hired them. The three-judge panel said that, at this stage, courts were obligated to consider the case only from the Ellison family's perspective.
The officers have said they noticed through an open door that Ellison's apartment was in disarray and that when they asked if he was OK, Ellison responded with an ambiguous "What does it look like?"
"The apartment was very disheveled. ... The glass-topped coffee table was shattered in an area in front of Mr. Ellison," said Bill Mann, a deputy city attorney for Little Rock. "The manner in which Mr. Ellison spoke led them to be suspicious and wonder if he really was OK." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brady lawsuit transferred from Minnesota to New York court
Court Line |
2015/08/03 22:34
|
Tom Brady's lawsuit against the NFL in which he wants his four-game suspension overturned will be heard in New York instead of Minnesota.
Brady and the players' union filed their suit Wednesday in Minnesota. But the NFL already had filed papers Tuesday in New York, moments after announcing that Commissioner Roger Goodell upheld the suspension for Brady's involvement in the use of underinflated footballs in the AFC championship game.
U.S. District Judge Richard Kyle, based in Minnesota, ordered the transfer.
The judge wrote that he "sees little reason for this action to have been commenced in Minnesota at all."
He noted that Brady plays in Massachusetts, the union is headquartered in Washington and the NFL in New York, Kyle added that "the arbitration proceedings took place in New York and the award was issued in New York." Jeffrey Kessler, the lead attorney for Brady and the union, wasn't concerned about this game of musical witness chairs. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appeals court upholds California's shark fin ban
Court Line |
2015/07/29 19:47
|
A federal appeals court Monday dismissed a legal challenge to a California law banning the sale, distribution and possession of shark fins.
The legislation does not conflict with a 19th century law that gives federal officials authority to manage shark fishing off the California coast or significantly interfere with interstate commerce, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said.
The 2-1 ruling upheld a lower court decision tossing the lawsuit brought by the Chinatown Neighborhood Association and Asian Americans for Political Advancement, a political action committee.
The groups had argued that the ban — passed in 2011 — unfairly targeted the Chinese community, which considers shark fin soup a delicacy. Shark finning is the practice of removing the fins from a living shark, leaving the animal to die.
Joseph Breall, an attorney for the groups, said they were reviewing their options and had not yet decided whether to appeal. He said he was heartened by the dissenting opinion by Judge Stephen Reinhardt, who said the plaintiffs should have been allowed to amend their lawsuit.
The plaintiffs had argued on appeal that the shark fin law conflicted with the federal law intended to manage shark fishing off the California coast.
The majority in the 9th Circuit ruling, however, said the federal law has no requirement that a certain number of sharks be harvested, and even if it did, the California law still allowed sharks to be taken for purposes other than obtaining their fins.
The federal law, additionally, envisions a broad role for states in crafting fishery management plans, and, like California's ban, makes conservation paramount, the court said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Law Firm & Attorney Directory |
| Law Firm PR News provides the most current career information of legal professionals and is the top source for law firms and attorneys. |
| Lawyer & Law Firm Directory |
|
|
Law Firm PR News RSS
