In the news: "Attorney Leonard Deutchman found the Supreme Court's admonishment in Quon that the "judiciary risks error by elaborating too fully on the Fourth Amendment implications of emerging technology before its role in society has become clear" lacked much-needed guidance for lower courts."
Source: Law.Com's Daily Legal Newswire. 22 July 2010. Copyright 2009. ALM Properties, Inc. All rights reserved. Subscribe <http://store.law.com/registration/register.asp?subscribeto=nw>.
This post was written by Chuck Kallendorf: "In a case that was closely watched by courts, and family and international law practitioners, the Supreme Court, last Monday, found that an order prohibiting the removal of a child from a country without the noncustodial parent's consent is enforceable under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction , a Law.com reported yesterday morning..."
Continue reading this interesting post and reach the active links by clicking on the author's name.
Source:
This post was written by Chuck Kallendorf: "Anna Christensen and Stanford's Alex Harris at ScotusBlog, last Tuesday reported on the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Renico v. Lett , No. 09-338.
"At issue in the case," they summarized, "was the trial judge's decision to declare a mistrial in respondent Reginald Lett's first trial on first-degree murder charges. Neither Lett nor the state had asked for a mistrial on the record; after four hours of deliberations, the jury had sent the judge a note asking what would happen if it could not agree. In his second trial, the jury found Lett guilty. He appealed, arguing that the Double Jeopardy Clause prohibited the state from trying him again. The Michigan Court of Appeals agreed and reversed his conviction, but it was then in turn reversed by the Michigan Supreme Court. Relying on the U.S. Supreme Court's holding nearly two hundred years ago in United States v. Perez, that court reasoned that a new trial after a mistrial does not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause as long as there was a 'manifest necessity' for the mistrial, as reflected by the trial judge's exercise of its 'sound discretion'; moreover, the Michigan Supreme Court noted, the U.S. Supreme Court has subsequently held that appellate courts must generally defer to the trial judge's determination that the jury is deadlocked."
Continue reading this interesting post and reach the active links by clicking on the author's name.
Source:
From an e-newsletter:
"Justice Stevens Invented the Internet
http://www.llrx.com/features/supremecourtandinternet.htm
With the announcement that Justice John Paul Stevens will resign from the Supreme Court at the end of this term, Jonathan Band and Matt Schruers focus on one of his opinions that has had a direct daily impact on virtually all Americans: the majority opinion in Sony v. Universal, decided by the Supreme Court in 1984. This decision is the legal foundation of the Digital Age.
The Government Domain: New & Free Regulations Trackers
http://www.llrx.com/columns/govdomain45.htm
Peggy Garvin reviews new, free, non-government resources that have recently come online to complement the official
Of Refrigerators and E-Discovery
http://www.llrx.com/features/processandediscovery.htm
Conrad J. Jacoby's commentary offers perspective on the complexities and nuances of technology innovations, in the home and in the office, causing him to reflect on how incomplete or incorrect impressions of how a responding party organizes and manages its business records impacts knowledge management and e-records...
Source: Pacifici, Sabrina. "New on LLRX.com for April 2010." Copyright © LLRX TM, Law Library Resource Xchange, LLC. All rights reserved. Subscribe <http://www.llrx.com/subscribe.htm>.
To reach the blog post and the active links, click on the link above.
Source:
This post was written by Chuck Kallendorf: "Victims of domestic violence advocates are sounding the warning about a little-noticed U.S. Supreme Court case they say could make it much harder for battered women and men to enforce restraining orders against their abusers, a Law.com article yesterday reported.
"The case Robertson v.
ScotusBlog has more here.
Petition for certiorari
Brief in opposition
To reach the blog post and the active links, click on the author's name.
Source:
From the e-newsletter: "Created and maintained by Professor Harold Spaeth of Michigan State University College of Law, the Supreme Court Database contains information about each case decided by the Court between the 1953 and 2009 terms. Interactive search tools allow users to design and run their own statistical analysis or look up data about individual cases by case name or citation. The database includes more than 200 elements of information about each case, including which court's decision was reviewed, how each justice voted, and links to the opinion on Westlaw, Lexis and Findlaw.com. Users can search cases by topic, limiting by "court era," by the law's constitutionality, and by individual justices. Because the database allows users to search by case, it is possible to analyze data with only basic statistical knowledge. Set to the right parameters, the database can answer questions like "Which decisions in the 1980s involved school desegregation?" or "In which criminal law cases did Justice Brennan and Chief Justice Burger vote the same way?" There are two ways to analyze the data available from the database. First is the online version, which requires no specialized software. The analysis is performed on the website by specifying the set of cases of interest and then summarizing selected variables. Second, the website contains downloadable versions of the database in a variety of formats which can be used to perform more complicated analyses. The downloadable empirical datasets, which are fairly technical, are intended primarily for political scientists, but the search tools could be used by other researchers of the Court, such as journalists, librarians, and students. Additionally, help is available on the site to aid users with searches and using the database to its fullest capability. The database is continuously updated by the Supreme Court Database's research team. [KN]
Source: "InSite." Vol.15, No.15. 22 March 2010
This post was written by Chuck Kallendorf: "The United States Supreme Court unveiled its new, updated website yesterday.
The new design appears cleaner and maybe more modern than the old version, which had been hosted & maintained by the Government Printing Office since its design & inception in 2000. The new layout in some ways resembles an iGoogle format with its building slide show.
The Court's press release describes it as having "an updated and more user-friendly design. While continuing to provide online access to the Court's slip opinions, orders, oral argument transcripts, schedules, court rules, bar admission forms, and other familiar information, it also has several new features, including enhanced search capabilities, an interactive argument calendar, improved graphics, and additional historic information, with plans to continue to update and expand features over time...."
To reach the blog post and the active links, click on the author's name.
Source:
This post was written by Chuck Kallendorf: "The United States Supreme Court, yesterday and the day before, issued rulings seen by some as further weakening defendants' Miranda rights.
Last Tuesday, the Court in
Maryland v. Shatzer, yesterday, established new, more permissive rules for police who want to question a suspect for a second time after the suspect invokes Miranda's right to remain silent.
Law.com this morning said that latter case in particular "weakens the so-called rule evolved from Edwards v. Arizona in 1981 , which stated that, once a suspect invokes Miranda, any subsequent waiver of the right triggered by a police request is deemed involuntary -- making further police questioning improper...
Continue reading this interesting post and reach the active links by clicking on the author's name.
Source:
In the news: "Electronic privacy in the workplace is a tangled subject, with only a few sure footholds for employers. Attorneys are hoping a Supreme Court ruling will provide unifying guidance on employer monitoring of employee text messages in a case currently under consideration by the justices."
Source: Law.Com's Daily Legal Newswire. 9 February 2010. Copyright 2009. ALM Properties, Inc. All rights reserved. Subscribe <http://store.law.com/registration/register.asp?subscribeto=nw>.
