|
|
|
Pistorius prosecutors file appeal at Supreme Court
Politics |
2015/08/16 13:11
|
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 fines Washington state over education funding
Corporate Governance |
2015/08/15 13:12
|
Washington officials are considering a special legislative session after the state Supreme Court issued daily fines a of $100,000 until lawmakers comply with a court order to improve the way the state pays for its basic education system.
Thursday's order, signed by all nine justices of the high court, ordered that the fine start immediately, and be put into a dedicated education account.
The court encouraged Gov. Jay Inslee to call a special session, saying that if the Legislature complies with the court's previous rulings for the state to deliver a plan to fully fund education, the penalties accrued during a special session would be refunded.
Inslee and legislative leaders are set to meet Monday in Seattle discuss what next steps the state should take.
"There is much that needs to be done before a special session can be called," Inslee said in a statement. "I will ask lawmakers to do that work as quickly as humanly possible so that they can step up to our constitutional and moral obligations to our children and lift the court sanctions."
The ruling was the latest development in a long-running impasse between lawmakers and justices, who in 2012 ruled that the state is failing to meet its constitutional duty to pay for the cost of basic education for its 1 million schoolchildren.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court fines Washington state over education funding
Breaking Legal News |
2015/08/14 08:42
|
Washington officials are considering a special legislative session after the state Supreme Court issued daily fines a of $100,000 until lawmakers comply with a court order to improve the way the state pays for its basic education system.
Thursday's order, signed by all nine justices of the high court, ordered that the fine start immediately, and be put into a dedicated education account.
The court encouraged Gov. Jay Inslee to call a special session, saying that if the Legislature complies with the court's previous rulings for the state to deliver a plan to fully fund education, the penalties accrued during a special session would be refunded.
Inslee and legislative leaders are set to meet Monday in Seattle discuss what next steps the state should take.
"There is much that needs to be done before a special session can be called," Inslee said in a statement. "I will ask lawmakers to do that work as quickly as humanly possible so that they can step up to our constitutional and moral obligations to our children and lift the court sanctions."
The ruling was the latest development in a long-running impasse between lawmakers and justices, who in 2012 ruled that the state is failing to meet its constitutional duty to pay for the cost of basic education for its 1 million schoolchildren.
Thomas Ahearne, an attorney for the plaintiffs, said that the court's action "is long overdue."
"The state has known for many, many years that it's violating the constitutional rights of our public school kids," Ahearne said. "And the state has been told by the court in rulings in this case to fix it, and the state has just been dillydallying along."
The lawsuit against the state was brought by a coalition of school districts, parents, teachers and education groups — known as the McCleary case for the family named in the suit.
In its original ruling, and repeated in later follow-up rulings, the justices have told the Legislature to find a way to pay for the reforms and programs they had already adopted, including all-day kindergarten, smaller class sizes, student transportation and classroom supplies, and to fix the state's overreliance on local tax levies to pay for education. Relying heavily on local tax levies leads to big disparities in funding between school districts, experts say. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appeals court won't reconsider ex-Virginia governor's case
Law Center |
2015/08/12 23:23
|
A federal appeals court on Tuesday declined to review the case of former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, letting his convictions on public corruption charges stand.
A three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had unanimously upheld McDonnell's convictions in July. In its brief order on Tuesday, the full 15-member court said it won't reconsider that panel's ruling.
Eight judges voted against rehearing McDonnell's case, and seven others "deeming themselves disqualified, did not participate," the order said.
A jury in September found McDonnell and his wife, Maureen, guilty of doing favors for wealthy vitamin executive Jonnie Williams in exchange for more than $165,000 in gifts and loans.
The former Republican governor, once widely considered a possible running mate for presidential candidate Mitt Romney, was convicted of 11 counts and was sentenced to two years in prison. His wife was sentenced to one year and one day on eight counts. Both have been free while they pursue separate appeals.
It's unclear whether Bob McDonnell will now be required to report to prison. He can still appeal his convictions to the U.S. Supreme Court.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal court: Anti-Muslim group can't post ads on buses
Court Watch |
2015/08/12 08:42
|
An anti-Muslim group cannot post ads on buses in Washington state showing photos of wanted terrorists and wrongly claiming the FBI offers a $25 million reward for one of their captures, a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday.
A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a claim by the American Freedom Defense Initiative that King County violated its First Amendment right to free speech by refusing to post the advertisements on buses.
The group — whose leader, Pamela Geller, organized the Prophet Muhammad cartoon contest in Texas that exploded in violence in May — has similar bus ads in other cities and has gone to court with mixed results after some transportation officials rejected them.
David Yerushalmi, the group's lawyer, said it will appeal Wednesday's ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The American Freedom Defense Initiative sought to display an ad in Washington state called "Faces of Global Terrorism," which included 16 photographs of militants with their names listed and the statement "AFDI Wants You to Stop a Terrorist." It said the FBI offers a $25 million reward to capture one of the people shown.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Penn State ex-officials' case heads to appeals court hearing
Breaking Legal News |
2015/08/11 23:23
|
The criminal case against three former high-ranking Penn State administrators is headed to a Pennsylvania appellate courtroom, nearly four years after two of them were first charged. A decision against them could clear the way for trial.
The group of Superior Court sessions in a state Capitol courtroom on Tuesday will address the actions of Penn State's then-general counsel, Cynthia Baldwin, as the men were being investigated for an alleged cover-up of child sex abuse complaints against Jerry Sandusky.
The judges are expected to conduct three separate half-hour sessions, one each for former university president Graham Spanier, former vice president Gary Schultz and former athletic director Tim Curley.
The appellate court file is sealed, so the precise nature of the legal dispute is somewhat clouded. But the appeals were launched after a January order by Dauphin County Judge Todd Hoover that rejected their arguments attacking the fairness and legality of the process that led to charges.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Texas man charged in killing of 8 set for court appearance
Court Watch |
2015/08/10 23:23
|
A man charged with capital murder in the fatal shooting of a family of six children and two parents at their Houston home is set to make his first court appearance.
David Conley, who authorities say was previously in a contentious relationship with the mother, is due in Harris County court Monday. The 48-year-old Conley, who has a violent criminal history, is being held in jail without bond. He doesn't yet have an attorney.
The dead were identified as 40-year-old Valerie Jackson and her husband, 50-year-old Dewayne Jackson. The children killed include a 13-year-old believed to be Conley's son from his relationship with Valerie Jackson.
Authorities responded to the home Saturday after relatives requested a welfare check. They say after an hours-long standoff with Conley ended, they found all eight victims shot in the head.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
