A federal appeals court on Tuesday backed the judge who ruled against the NFL and let quarterback Michael Vick keep more than $16 million in roster bonuses from the Atlanta Falcons.

The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday affirmed Judge David Doty's order saying Vick had already earned the bonuses before his dogfighting conviction, so the money wasn't subject to forfeiture.

Vick served 18 months in prison and is now with the Philadelphia Eagles.

Doty has long handled matters arising from the NFL's collective bargaining agreement. After Doty ruled in the Vick bonus case, the NFL accused him of bias and sought to end his oversight of its contract with the players union.

The appeals court said the contract should remain under Doty's oversight.

NFL spokesman Greg Aiello did not say whether the league planned a further appeal, but he said the 8th Circuit upheld Doty's ruling on Vick's bonuses in large part because it found the contract's forfeiture language ambiguous.

"That is something that we will seek to change at the bargaining table to ensure that bonus payments are paid to players who comply with their contracts and perform on the field," Aiello said.

Vick, a former Atlanta Falcons star, was released from federal custody July 20 after serving 18 months of a 23-month sentence for running a dogfighting ring in Surry County, Va. The Eagles signed Vick to a $1.6 million contract for 2009, with a team option for the second year at $5.2 million, but he has not played much.

Federal prosecutors accused a high-profile South Florida attorney of concocting a Ponzi scheme that lured millions of dollars from investors with promises of big payoffs from legal settlements that never existed, according to court documents filed Monday.

The civil complaint, seeking forfeiture of eight pieces of property owned by lawyer Scott Rothstein, marks the first time prosecutors have leveled fraud allegations at him_ even though criminal charges have yet to be announced. It was filed the same day FBI and Internal Revenue Service agents seized luxury cars, boats, bank accounts and other possessions of the once high-flying Rothstein. The forfeiture complaint put the value of the real estate at more than $18 million.

In the complaint, prosecutors claim that Rothstein operated the Ponzi scheme since 2005 using his law firm, Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler. Investors were promised fat profits of 20 percent or more by paying lump sums to people who had won legal settlements that would supposedly pay out larger amounts over a longer period.

It was all a lie, the complaint contends. Like all Ponzi schemes, new investor money was used to pay earlier investors to keep up an illusion of success, backed up by false documents showing bank accounts containing fictional large sums.

South Carolina's Supreme Court ruled Thursday that an ethics investigation into Gov. Mark Sanford's travel must be made public, clearing the way for lawmakers considering impeachment to review a report on the probe.

Sanford's lawyers had tried keep a report on a criminal investigation by the State Ethics Commission from being released to the House of Representatives as leaders there decide whether to move forward with impeachment efforts.

The commission's investigation was launched after Sanford returned from a five-day rendezvous with an Argentine lover in June that prompted investigations by The Associated Press into his travel practices. The AP found Sanford used state airplanes for personal and political purposes; used pricey commercial travel despite a state low-cost travel requirement; and didn't report private plane trips given by friends and donors.

Sanford's spokesman and lawyers, as well as Ethics Commission Director Herb Hayden, did not immediately respond to questions.

The governor said shortly after the investigation began that he would waive confidentiality rights, but his lawyers later argued he only intended to allow the scope of the investigation to be released. Attorneys wanted Sanford to have a chance to respond to the report before lawmakers saw it.

South Carolina's Supreme Court ruled Thursday that an ethics investigation into Gov. Mark Sanford's travel must be made public, clearing the way for lawmakers considering impeachment to review a report on the probe.

Sanford's lawyers had tried keep a report on a criminal investigation by the State Ethics Commission from being released to the House of Representatives as leaders there decide whether to move forward with impeachment efforts.

The commission's investigation was launched after Sanford returned from a five-day rendezvous with an Argentine lover in June that prompted investigations by The Associated Press into his travel practices. The AP found Sanford used state airplanes for personal and political purposes; used pricey commercial travel despite a state low-cost travel requirement; and didn't report private plane trips given by friends and donors.

Sanford's spokesman and lawyers, as well as Ethics Commission Director Herb Hayden, did not immediately respond to questions.

The governor said shortly after the investigation began that he would waive confidentiality rights, but his lawyers later argued he only intended to allow the scope of the investigation to be released. Attorneys wanted Sanford to have a chance to respond to the report before lawmakers saw it.

Attorneys for John Allen Muhammad released a May 2008 letter on Wednesday in which the mastermind of the deadly 2002 sniper attacks in the Washington, D.C., area proclaims his innocence.

The rambling, handwritten letter was made available because of requests for a statement from Muhammad, his attorneys wrote on the Web page of their law firm. The letter was filed in federal court in connection with Muhammad's unsuccessful attempt to block his execution, the attorneys said.

Muhammad, 48, is scheduled to die by injection on Nov. 10 at a Virginia prison.

In the letter dated May 8, 2008, and rife with misspellings, Muhammad writes of discussions with a new team of attorneys and of assurances that "exculpatory evidence" that he claims was withheld from his trial "will prove my innocent and what really happen ...."

The letter adds: "So all you police and prosecutors can stand-down-'rushing' to murder this innocent black man for something he nor his son (Lee) had nothing to do with ...."

Lee Boyd Malvo was Muhammad's teenage accomplice, who is serving a life sentence. Muhammad fostered a father-son relationship with Malvo but the two were not related.

The California Supreme Court is set to hear arguments challenging a key section of a law aimed at protecting children from sexual predators.

Jessica's Law prohibits registered sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of a school or park.

It mandates that all those paroled after Nov. 8, 2006 — when the law took effect — must comply or face more jail time.

The case to be heard Tuesday claims the requirement violates the constitutional rights of sex offenders.

Four registered sex offenders have sued the state, arguing the law makes it impossible to find a place to live.

The Ohio Supreme Court on Wednesday set two new execution dates even as the state continues to rework its procedures for putting condemned inmates to death by injection.

The execution dates are the first in four and a half months set by the court, which had been scheduling executions about once a month.

The death penalty is temporarily on hold in Ohio while the state develops the new policies. The update follows a botched execution on Sept. 15 that was halted after two hours when executioners couldn't find a usable vein on inmate Rommel Broom.

The court's decision Wednesday set a May 13 execution date for Michael Beuke, 47, convicted of the 1983 murder of Robert Craig, a man he met while hitchhiking on Interstate 275 in southwest Ohio.

Beuke shot Craig twice in the head and once in the chest, dumped his body in the bushes and stole his car.