|
|
|
Court rules for suspect in dispute over confession
Headline News |
2009/04/06 16:55
|
The Supreme Court ruled Monday that confessions obtained by federal authorities before a suspect's first court appearance may be inadmissible if more than six hours elapse between an arrest and a court date.
The court said in a 5-4 decision that long delays before a suspect sees a judge can give the government too much leverage over someone who has been arrested.
"Federal agents would be free to question suspects for extended periods before bringing them out in the open, and we have always known what custodial secrecy leads to," Justice David Souter wrote in the majority opinion. The prisoner in the case, Johnnie Corley, was arrested on suspicion of robbing a credit union in Norristown, Pa. The FBI agents who arrested him did not take him to court for his initial appearance for 29 1/2 hours, during which time they elicited a confession from Corley. Under federal law and previous court decisions, confessions obtained within six hours of an arrest are presumed to be valid and may be used at trial. The question in Corley's case was what courts should do with confessions when there is a delay before the first court appearance. The federal appeals court in Philadelphia said Corley's admission that he robbed the bank could be used against him, ruling that the confession was voluntary despite the delay. |
|
|
|
|
|
Summary of Supreme Court actions Wednesday
Headline News |
2009/04/02 11:56
|
_ Ruled for employers who want to force unionized workers to pursue their age discrimination claims through arbitration instead of a federal lawsuit. The court, in a 5-4 decision, said an arbitration agreement negotiated between an employer and a union that strips them of their option to take complaints to court is binding on workers. The dissenting justices said the high court in the past ruled that unions cannot bargain away employees' federal forum rights in discrimination cases.
_ Said the federal government should pay federally appointed lawyers for working on state clemency requests for death row inmates. The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati had said that the law does not allow federal public defenders to be paid for working on state clemency requests. The high court disagreed and reversed that decision on a 7-2 vote.
_ Ruled that the government may consider cost in deciding whether to order power plants to undertake environmental upgrades that would protect fish. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York said that the Clean Water Act does not allow cost to be used when deciding what technology would best minimize environmental impacts. But Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for a 6-3 majority, said even the appeals court and environmentalists "concede that some form of cost-benefit analysis is permitted." |
|
|
|
|
|
Coleman won't rule out appeal if loses Senate case
Headline News |
2009/03/26 15:44
|
Republican Norm Coleman, trying to regain his U.S. Senate seat, visited the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday and didn't rule out an appeal if a Minnesota court rules against him in his recount battle against Democrat Al Franken.
One of Minnesota's two Senate seats has been vacant this year after an election last November was so close it triggered a statewide recount. Coleman's first Senate term expired in January, and he is contesting the recount outcome that put Franken ahead by 225 votes. The uncertainty has eroded Democratic party sway, and with it President Barack Obama's agenda, in the U.S. Senate. Democrats now control 58 of the 100 Senate seats, and they have sometimes struggled to get the 60 votes required to clear procedural hurdles under Senate rules. The Minnesota court decision on Coleman's old seat could come "any day," Coleman told reporters in the Capitol, where he had come to attend the Senate Republican's weekly luncheon and brief senators on his court battle. "We'll have to see what they (the Minnesota judges) do and see what the next step is," Coleman said. "I'm not anticipating at this point being across the street," he continued, looking out the window at the U.S. Supreme Court building. But "this is about getting it right," he said. "If this court doesn't do that, we'll kind of look at the next level."
|
|
|
|
|
|
Philadelphia law firm disbands, citing economy
Headline News |
2009/03/23 20:22
|
A major Philadelphia law firm founded in 1903 is disbanding, citing the economic crisis.
WolfBlock LLP has more than 300 lawyers. The firm announced Monday that the partners have voted to shut down, but not immediately. They plan to keep operating for several months so the transition will be orderly for clients and employees. WolfBlock says its core practice is real estate law and the recession has hurt that greatly. The credit crisis is another factor it the decision to close. In addition to its Philadelphia headquarters, WolfBlock has offices in Boston; Cherry Hill, N.J.; Harrisburg, Pa.; New York; Norristown, Pa.; Roseland, N.J., and Wilmington, Del. |
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Court narrows minority district protections
Headline News |
2009/03/09 17:19
|
The Supreme Court ruled Monday that electoral districts must have a majority of African-Americans or other minorities to be protected by a provision of the Voting Rights Act. The 5-4 decision, with the court's conservatives in the majority, could make it harder for southern Democrats to draw friendly boundaries after the 2010 Census. The court declined to expand protections of the landmark civil rights law to take in electoral districts where the minority population is less than 50 percent of the total, but strong enough to effectively determine the outcome of elections. In 2007, the North Carolina Supreme Court struck down a state legislative district in which blacks made up only about 39 percent of the voting age population. The court said the Voting Rights Act applies only to districts with a numerical majority of minority voters. Justice Anthony Kennedy, announcing the court's judgment, said that requiring minorities to represent more than half the population "draws clear lines for courts and legislatures alike. The same cannot be said of a less exacting standard." |
|
|
|
|
|
Clark County District Court going paperless
Headline News |
2009/02/17 16:18
|
Clark County District Court plans to stop keeping paper documents in civil cases, instead scanning them and processing them electronically.
The plan is expected to eventually extend to criminal cases as part of a plan to make the court more accessible and efficient.
Former court executive Chuck Short says the idea is to develop a virtual court. The county gave the court system $8.1 million in 2005 to help develop its paperless system. Court officials that right now, about 11 percent of documents handled by the court clerk's office are filed without using paper. The court hopes that eventually, everything will be filed electronically. The new system is also expected to open up space in the case file room at the Regional Justice Center. |
|
|
|
|
Recent Lawyer News Updates |
|
|