|
|
|
ACLU to appeal court ruling in Missouri drug testing case
Court Watch |
2016/01/28 14:08
|
The American Civil Liberties Union said it plans to appeal a federal court ruling that upheld a technical college’s plan to force every incoming student to be tested for drugs.
Tony Rothert, legal director for the ACLU’s Missouri chapter, told the Jefferson City News Tribune that the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has given the organization until Jan. 4 to file a petition seeking a rehearing by either the same three-judge panel that issued the ruling earlier this month, or by all of the active 8th Circuit judges.
“We intend to request both,” Rothert said. “While rehearing is difficult to obtain, we are fortunate in this case to have a majority decision that is poorly crafted and departs from 8th Circuit and Supreme Court precedent.”
The ACLU filed the federal lawsuit in 2011 challenging a mandatory drug-testing policy Linn State Technical College’s Board of Regents approved in June of that year. The school since has changed its name to State Technical College of Missouri.
The lawsuit argued the policy violated the students’ Fourth Amendment right “to be secure . against unreasonable searches and seizures.”
When it started the program, the school said the testing policy was intended “to provide a safe, healthy and productive environment for everyone who learns and works at Linn State Technical College by detecting, preventing and deterring drug use and abuse among students.”
Under the policy, students had to pay a $50 fee for the drug test and could be blocked from attending if they refused to be tested.
U.S. District Judge Nanette Laughrey issued a ruling in September 2013 that limited the drug testing to five Linn State programs. But in its 2-1 vote earlier this month, the federal appeals court panel overturned her ruling as too narrow. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jeffrey Dahmer's lawyer suspended by Supreme Court
Court Watch |
2015/12/25 16:47
|
The Wisconsin Supreme Court on Wednesday suspended serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer's attorney for two months over a series of ethics violations tied largely to an attempt to help a client recover money spent on fake John Lennon memorabilia.
The justices also ordered Gerald Boyle to take courses in law office management and to pay $24,900 to cover the costs of the disciplinary proceedings against him.
Boyle rose to prominence in southeastern Wisconsin law circles after he defended Dahmer. The serial killer was sentenced to life in prison after confessing to 17 murders. Another inmate killed Dahmer in 1994. Boyle also gained fame for defending former Green Bay Packers star Mark Chmura against sexual assault charges. Chmura was ultimately acquitted in 2001.
Boyle didn't immediately return a voicemail left Wednesday at his Milwaukee office.
According to court documents, the state Office of Lawyer Regulation brought six misconduct counts against Boyle last year. Five counts were connected to a man who paid out-of-state galleries tens of thousands of dollars for a microphone Lennon had used and sketches the Beatles front man had drawn.
The man, identified only as D.P. in the documents, hired Boyle to represent him in efforts to recover his money after he learned the memorabilia was fake.
Boyle improperly deposited $65,000 in advance fees from D.P. in his office's operational account rather than in a client trust fund, according to court documents. The attorney also failed to prepare written fee agreements or explain in writing the basis for the fees.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court turns down appeal for Harvey family killer
Court Watch |
2015/12/22 16:48
|
A federal appeals court won't rehear the case of a man sentenced to death in the New Year's Day 2006 slaying of a Richmond family.
Lawyers for Ricky Jovan Gray had asked the 15-member U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to rehear claims that were rejected by a three-judge panel two weeks ago. The court rejected Gray's request on Tuesday.
Rob Lee, an attorney for Gray, says he now intends to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case.
Gray was convicted in the slayings of Bryan and Kathryn Harvey and their daughters, 9-year-old Stella and 4-year-old Ruby.
The 38-year-old claims his trial attorneys failed to present evidence that might have cast doubts on his confession and by not telling jurors that he was high on PCP during the murders.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court papers: Witness ID'd man in playground shooting
Court Watch |
2015/12/01 22:46
|
A witness's statement and photo identification led to the arrest of a man accused in a playground shootout that wounded 17 people, court papers show.
Joseph "Moe" Allen, 32, faces 17 counts of attempted murder in the Nov. 22 gunfight at Bunny Friend Playground after a neighborhood parade. He's being held in lieu of $1.7 million bond on those charges, and without bond on a Texas warrant accusing him of violating probation.
Defense attorney Kevin Boshea did not immediately return a call and email Monday. Allen's mother, Deborah Allen, told NOLA.com ' The Times-Picayune Sunday night that her son was in Texas the night of the gunfight. Calls to her home on Monday got repeated busy signals.
Police are still trying to identify other people involved in the shooting. Allen's arrest was based on a witness who gave the "name and nickname of one of the many shooters ... in this mass shooting," and then identified Allen in a "six-pack photographic lineup" at the local police station, New Orleans police Detective Chad Cockerham said in a sworn statement.
Allen "was observed walking into Bunny Friend Playground and firing a semi-automatic handgun into the crowd," Cockerham said.
Cockerham described hearing a "barrage of gunfire erupt" at Bunny Friend Playground as police headed there to break up an "unauthorized party."
"They were met with chaos and panic of citizens running in numerous directions across the park as well as throughout the surrounding streets," he wrote, adding that "tires ... were spinning and screeching."
For Allen, the Texas warrant was issued Nov. 25, based on the New Orleans allegations, since travel outside of Texas would violate Allen's parole, said Jason Clark, a spokesman for the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
South African appeals court nears Pistorius ruling
Court Watch |
2015/11/29 22:46
|
An official says a top South African appeals court is finalizing a decision on whether to send Oscar Pistorius back to prison by overturning a lower court's manslaughter conviction and finding the double-amputee Olympian guilty of murdering girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp.
Paul Myburgh, registrar of the Supreme Court of Appeal, told The Associated Press on Monday that no date for the ruling has been announced.
Eyewitness News, a South African media outlet, says a ruling is expected this week. It cites unnamed court officials.
Pistorius, 29, was released from jail on Oct. 19 after serving a year in prison and is under house arrest.
Prosecutors say Pistorius shot Steenkamp during an argument on Valentine's Day 2013. The defense says Pistorius killed Steenkamp by mistake, thinking an intruder was in his house.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Snowboarders fight ban at Utah resort in appeals court
Court Watch |
2015/11/17 22:09
|
A group of snowboarders who argue a ban on their sport at Utah's Alta Ski Area amounts to discrimination are set to present their case Tuesday to a federal appeals court in Denver.
The lawsuit, filed in early 2014, brought renewed attention to the long-festering culture clash on the slopes between skiers and snowboarders.
Alta lawyers have defended the ban, saying resort officials made a business decision to lure skiers to the private resort east of Salt Lake City with the promise of a snowboarder-free experience, and it's well within its rights to keep snowboards off the slopes.
The U.S. Forest Service, which approves a permit for Alta, has backed the ski area in the court battle.
The four snowboarders and their attorneys have countered that Alta doesn't have the right to keep snowboarders off public land designated by Congress for skiing and other sports. They point to 119 other ski resorts that operate on public land that allow snowboarding.
They take issue with Alta's claim that skiers find the slopes safer because they don't have to worry about being hit by snowboarders whose sideways stance leaves them with a blind spot. Alta's ban is irrational and based on stereotypes of snowboarders.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lawyer News RSS Feed
