It is time for a change in the Kentucky criminal law according to lawmakers and law professors. They argue the penalties now outweigh the crimes and contribute to the $400 million corrections budget which is breaking some counties budgets.

Texas state prisons were locked down for a period of time after a state lawmaker received three phone calls from a death row inmate. The calls were made from a smuggled phone and state lawmakers are now requiring that phone signals are jammed in prisons. The move is questionable and may interfere with a federal law that does not allow interfering with the federal airwaves. The response, “why don’t you do it and see what the consequences are?”

Is it identity theft for an illegal alien to pick nine random numbers to try to gain employment to work. This has been a favorite tool of prosecutors to add two years to the sentence for aggravated identity theft. The defendant unknowingly used a social security number to minor child. Now the debate centers on whether the statute requires knowledge that the social security was indeed another person’s.

An unintended consequence of the recent Supreme Court’s 2^nd Amendment decision could allow the enactment of stronger gun laws in the future. The Brady Institute argues that by taking away the extremes of the gun debate, the Supreme Court left reasonable middle ground for common sense gun regulation that most Americans want.

A November 4^th ballot initiative is set to decriminalize the possession of small amounts of marijuana. The opponents of the law, District Attorneys who themselves admitted to using marijuana in college, argue that decriminalization of possession of marijuana sends the wrong message and will lead to a host of other social problems.

The Indian Government is split but considering taking a large step forward in decriminalizing homosexual conduct in India. The debate is currently centered on crime and morality. That which is moral is naturally legal and that which is immoral is naturally illegal. Advocates for the change argue this is a gross oversimplification.

Wisconsin is taking the lead to exonerees of crimes after they have left the criminal system. The Wisconsin Innocence Project finds it inexcusable that parolees have help obtaining a certain level of their lives back whereas people who were later released from prison after being exonerated have none of the similar safety nets.

An effort to re-allocate murder trials based on judicial economy appears doomed to fail in Australia. The main consideration is not wanting the victim’s families to somehow think that one murder is more or less serious than another. The fundamental principle of justice is that we are all equal under the under and entitled to the same rights and protections, and that includes victims of crime.

As O.J. Simpson awaits sentencing after his recent conviction for kidnapping and armed robbery, the former NFL star has again appeared in the news. Simpson’s NFL Hall of Fame ring is alleged to have been given to a memorabilia dealer by Simpson shortly after the alleged robbery for which he was recently convicted. It now is pursued by Fred Goldman, the father of the man Simpson is alleged to have murdered in the now infamous 1994 incident. Goldman, who has won a $33.5 million wrongful death suit against Simpson, is seeking possession of the ring in furtherance of satisfying that judgment.

New accounts put forth by the prosecution in the trial of U.S. student Amanda Knox for murder present a lurid tale that allegedly arose as part of a Satanic rite of initiation. Knox, who has been imprisoned in Italy since the body of her British roommate was discovered after having been fatally stabbed, insisted she was innocent and that she herself had been a victim of police brutality during the interrogation following her arrest. She remains imprisoned, as does her former Italian boyfriend and an individual who allegedly masterminded the slaying, as authorities attempt to conduct an expedited trial on the matter.

Medical ID theft is quickly becoming one of the most prevalent forms of identity theft in the country, a trend that can cause large hassles to its victims at best and at worst can prove deadly. The concept arises when an individual presents at a hospital claiming to be another in order to obtain medical treatment that he/she otherwise would have been unable to afford. The treatment that is administered is then added to the chart of the named patient, a process that permanently alters the medical history of the victim. While this may only result in increased premiums individually and systemically, this fraud also may result in misdiagnoses when an individual is admitted for emergency treatment, a prospect which can prove fatal.

The state of Florida recently released crime statistics, an announcement that included the development of several interesting trends. As the national economy has faltered, crimes of opportunity are on the rise, a trend that was reflected in Palm Beach for the first half of 2008. The vigilance of many community police departments in ramping up efforts against violent crime, however, has helped to reduce instances of assault, rape, and murder. While police spokesmen were careful not to attribute too much credit or blame to law enforcement alone –noting that larger trends such as the economy and uncontrollable elements such as the weather also impact crime rates- these numbers are certainly helpful in detecting trends and preparing responses to various types of criminal behavior.

Both the Boston and Seattle offices of ACORN –the community organizer association recently engulfed in mass allegations of voter registration fraud- were burglarized in the past week, with computers taken and various phone and internet connections destroyed in the process. While the theft and vandalism case has not yet been resolved, these attacks join a growing trend of violence and threats against the group. Members of ACORN attribute this surge in animosity toward the group to the recent quotes of Republican nominees John McCain and Sarah Palin, which ACORN insists are both inflammatory and untrue.

Oregon voters are being presented with two proposals in this November’s election, each designed to crack down on drug and property theft crimes throughout the state. Should both proposals pass, as current polls show will happen, the proposal with the greater vote total will become law. The proposals –Measures 57 and 61- increase prison sentences for repeat offenders of repeat non-violent criminals and mandate a three-year sentence on a first-time drug offense, respectively. Critics of each plan note the likely high cost to the state of administering the proposals, while supporters stress the corresponding savings to the citizenry that they expect will result from a decrease in non-violent offenses such as theft.

The FBI is struggling to investigate the multitude of fraud allegations that have arisen in the wake of the recent financial crisis. As many of the agency’s resources have shifted toward national defense post-9/11, there has been a corresponding drop-off in the number of agents and investigations conducted in the field of white-collar crime. Critics have argued that a swifter response from the FBI may have discouraged some of the practices in the industry that contributed to the financial collapse of recent weeks.

Six-year old Cole Puffinburger, who was kidnapped as his family was held at gun point in their Las Vegas home last week, was found in good condition on Saturday evening. While the exact circumstances of the disappearance remain in question, it has been alleged that the boy’s grandfather has ties to a Mexican methamphetamine ring and that the kidnapping was in retaliation to a dispute with this group. Authorities are continuing to investigate the connection, but all parties were thrilled that the child returned home safely.

A war vet admits he made a mistake. The judge who sentenced him also admits he made a mistake in his understanding of his sentencing authority. Two wrongs do not make a right in this case as the Supreme Court refuses to hear the case and the honest mistake cannot be undone. The man goes back to a federal penitentiary to complete his 5 year sentence.

The public defender office recently announced it no longer will be contracting with private attorneys for the estimated 10,000 cases in which it has conflicts because the office is out of money. One of the reasons it made this choice because it is one of the few areas it still has discretion to cut funding and still fulfill its constitutional mandate.

Proponents of the execution of child rapists were disappointed with the Supreme Court’s refusal to reconsider the ban. They presented evidence to the Court showing that under military law, a child rapist could be put to death. Justice Scalia commented that the Eighth Amendment prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment renders capital punishment unacceptable is nonsense. “[T]he proposed Eighth Amendment would have been laughed to scorn if it had read 'no criminal penalty shall be imposed which the Supreme Court deems unacceptable.' "

A new law in Ohio allows police to force a person with two or more previous drunk driving convictions to submit to a blood or urine test without consent. The previous law required a warrant from a judge to test blood or urine for alcohol or drugs. A Delaware City Prosecutor thinks the law is a powerful change because it allows the police to obtain the best evidence there is and does not allow the suspect to withhold it.

A 2003 addition to the law made the most serious classification, sexual predator, a life-long designation. It also required offenders to register every 90 days with their local county sheriff and with other sheriffs where they work or go to school. It prohibits them from living within 1000 feet of a school. The court upheld the law in a 4-3 decision.

The law is being changed in Scotland criminalizing consensual sexual conduct between children ages 13-15. The current law punishes only boys who have consensual sex with a girl ages 13 to 15 of similar age. Opponents of the change argue that the criminalization will not have an effect in the reduction of sexual activity in teens and will in fact punish those who seek medical advice.

Edwin Vieira, Jr. argues that the right to Habeas Corpus is slowly being eroded by those in power and those who are seeking power. He argues that it is easier for those in power to maintain social control by labeling individuals enemy combatants and viewing habeas corpus as a legal technicality.

Over 35,000 people have failed to show for jury duty in Connecticut but have faced to potential penalties for failure to show. A spokesman for the division of criminal justice argues that it is nearly impossible to prove if a person received notice of his/her duty to appear so therefore no punishments have been handed out. Attempts to modify the law have failed three times.

In 2003 and 2004, the citizens of Columbus, Ohio lived in fear or the "Highway Sniper." On November 25, 2003, one of the sniper’s shots struck and killed a woman traveling with her friend. The initial investigation into that murder uncovered numerous shots fired in the same area, from the same gun. Just a short time after the sniper shootings in Washington, D.C., the community in Columbus feared they were facing another serial shooter. The gunman was known to frequent the I-270 outer belt, a major highway and point of travel in Columbus, and people began altering their daily routines to avoid the area. The following articles detail the investigation of the case and the eventual trial of Charles McCoy. The FBI Agent and Sheriff’s Deputy from the investigation as well as the prosecutor, defense attorney, and judge from the case have all detailed their own experiences and insights from solving the I-270 sniper case.

Defending the I-270 Sniper

Michael Miller
Defense Attorney for Charles McCoy

The case of State of Ohio vs. Charles McCoy was fascinating, but one I felt was destined for an ending that would satisfy very few. In 2005, when the trial started, I had practiced law for 42 years and tried a lot of criminal cases, including more than 50 first-degree aggravated murder cases. The vast majority were tried while I was a prosecutor. The Charles McCoy case was different, very different, from all the others.

[click here to read this article]

Prosecution Ruminations on Trying a Highly Publicized Case

Within the Confines of Ohio's Insanity Law

Ron J. O'Brien
Franklin County Prosecutor

Most citizens in Central Ohio became fully aware of the I-270 sniper many months before he was identified and an arrest was made. On a weekly basis, potential jurors discussed the freeway sniper around the office water cooler or were warned by the media on the nightly news that the freeway sniper was still at large—and shooting—and reminded to be careful where they drove their car or family van.

[click here to read this article]

The I-270 Sniper Case: Views from the Bench

Charles A. Schneider
Franklin County Court of Common Pleas Judge

I was asked to write a short article about my role in the case captioned State of Ohio v. Charles McCoy or what the central Ohio community came to know as the “Highway Shooter” case. Mr. McCoy was charged in a multiple count indictment including, among other crimes, aggravated murder for which the State was asking for the death penalty. The case was assigned to me during my first week at the Court of Common Pleas. Although I had been practicing law for over twenty-five years and a judge for eight of those years, I had just transferred from the Municipal Court (traffic and misdemeanor cases) to the Court of Common Pleas (the land of rapes, robberies and murders). The local newspaper commented something to the effect that “the rookie draws the “Highway Shooter”.

[click here to read this article]

The I-270 Shooting Case

Harry W. Trombitas,
Special Agent, FBI
&
Stephen L. Martin,
Chief Deputy, Franklin County Sheriff’s Office

Two women, life-long friends, were out for a great day of shopping and catching up. They were enjoying a beautiful morning together. It was approximately 9:58 am on Tuesday, November 25, 2003, when their lives would be changed forever.

As they drove along the south side of Columbus on I-270 eastbound, a loud “bang” rang out, startling both women. “What was that?” they both asked at the same moment. Mrs. Mary Cox was driving the Pontiac Grand Am at the time and searched frantically for the source of the noise. All of a sudden, her best friend, Mrs. Gail Knisley, slumped over in the front passenger seat. Mrs. Cox pulled the vehicle over to the side of the road and did her best to keep her composure as she dialed ‘911.’ Help arrived within minutes, which seemed like hours, yet Mrs. Knisley died from a gunshot wound that nicked her aorta.

[click here to read this article]

A new law in Rhode Island requires that all public middle and high schools teach students about the signs and dangers of dating violence in their health classes. The law is aimed at teaching teens the warning signs of abusive relationships. The program focuses on nurturing good relationships as well as avoiding abusive ones. The law is named the Lindsay Ann Burke Act after a 23-year-old who died as a result of being involved in an abusive relationship. Texas is the only other state that has a similar law on the books.

After years of delays and nine weeks to select a jury of eight women and four men, the trial of accused Atlanta Courthouse shooter Brian Nichols got underway under high security Monday. Nichols has pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity for killing a judge, court reporter and sheriff's deputy at the Fulton County Courthouse and a federal agent later that day. Defense attorneys claim Nichols is so deluded that he believed he was a slave carrying out a rebellion.

See the following link for updates and background information:

http://crime.about.com/od/current/a/brian_nichols.htm

Two states, Louisiana and Oregon, have laws that allow offenders of some crimes to be convicted with less than unanimous jury verdicts. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld those laws Monday when the court refused to hear the appeal of convicted Louisiana serial killer Derrick Todd Lee. Lee was convicted of second-degree murder. The jury voted 11-1 to convict. Because the verdict was not unanimous, Lee's attorneys appealed. The Supreme Court ruled in a previous case more than 30 years ago that the Constitution does not ban less than unanimous verdicts.

Former CIA Executive Director Kyle "Dusty" Foggo has pleaded guilty in Virginia federal court to a single conspiracy charge for steering contracts to his friend's document processing company. Foggo, formerly the third-highest-ranking official with the CIA, admitted he deprived the public of the right to honest services. Prosecutors said Foggo used his position at the CIA to influence the award of federal contracts to his friend. Foggo faces up to 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine when he is sentenced January 8.

Federals agents raided and detained about 300 people they believe to be illegal aliens working at House of Raeford's Columbia Farms poultry plant in Greenville -- an operation that one immigration official today called the biggest workplace raid ever in the Carolinas. All told, 450 officers were involved in the raid, though not all actually entered the building. In recent weeks, seven supervisors at the plant have pleaded guilty to falsifying employment documents. A human resources manager faces 20 counts of felony immigration fraud.

A Texas death-row inmate has lost his bid for a new sentencing hearing after complaining that the jury foreman at his capital murder trial read a Bible passage aloud to the entire jury before the panel returned his death sentence. During an initial penalty phase vote, 10 of the 12 juror voted for death. At that point, the jury foreman produced his personal Bible and read a passage aloud from Romans 13: 1- 6. The jury continued to deliberate for several hours. When a new vote was taken, the panel decided 12 to 0 in favor of death. Several circuit courts have ruled that the introduction of a Bible into jury deliberations violates a defendant's rights, but the Court declined to take the case and resolve the split.

O.J. Simpson faces the prospect of spending the rest of his life in prison after he was found guilty on 12 charges, including armed robbery and kidnapping. The verdicts came 13 years to the day after a Los Angeles jury acquitted Simpson of killing his former wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend Ronald Goldman. Simpson, 61, could get life in prison for these convictions. Clark County District Judge Jackie Glass set sentencing for December 5. Galanter, Simpson’s attorney, said he will file a motion for a new trial and appeal the case.

A federal grand jury indicted David Kernell, son of state Rep. Mike Kernell of Memphis, Tennessee on a single count of "intentionally accessing without authorization" the e-mail account of the GOP vice presidential candidate. Kernell entered a not guilty plea. The McCain-Palin campaign called the incident "a shocking invasion of the governor's privacy and a violation of law."

Civil Rights action arising out of a police raid of Callahan. The issue is that Callahan sued police following raid, alleging 4th amendment violation, since search of his residence was done without a warrant and only through the information of an undercover informant. The United States District Court originally ruled in favor of summary judgment, holding that the officers were entitled to qualified immunity based on reasonable belief. The 10th Circuit overruled this decision, holding that the officers couldn’t have reasonably believed the consent once removed doctrine applied to informants, and as a result no immunity should be granted. The Supreme Court granted certiorari, and also granted petition to review the Courts decision in Saucier v. Katz to determine if it should be overruled.

The issue in this case is whether the 6th Amendment requires that facts other than prior convictions be found by the jury or admitted by the defendant in order to impose consecutive sentences. Defendant in this case was convicted of two acts of first degree sexual abuse and burglary. Upon his conviction the circuit court imposed consecutive sentences based on its own factual findings. On appeal, the reviewing court found that defendant’s right to a jury trial were not violated because none of the three findings at issue went to an element of any crime for which defendant was to be punished. However the court did violate his 6th amendment rights when it imposed consecutive sentences based on this fact finding. As a result of this, the ct. of appeals decision was reversed and remanded to the Circuit Ct. leading to an appeal by Oregon to the Supreme Court.

Case involves a petition for habeas corpus challenging second-degree murder and two attempted second-degree murder convictions. Sarausad was convicted for these crimes as a result of having driven the car from which a drive by shooting. However, later interviews with the jury found that jurors were confused about the standard of liability necessary to prove accomplice liability. On appeal, this motion for habeas was granted because there was insufficient evidence to convict, and secondly that the jury’s instructions unconstitutionally relieved State of their burden of proof. The State appealed this decision and Sarausad cross-appealed alleging that the court erred in allowing for a retrial and not finding double jeopardy to have attached. On appeal the 9th Circuit court of appeals held that there was in fact sufficient evidence to convict Sarausad, but that vague jury instructions did impermissibly shift burden of proof. The court denied to attach double jeopardy, but defendant was released pending the State’s retrial of him in a reasonable time period.

This case arises from two separate opinions of the 9th Circ. Ct. of appeals. Pulido was convicted for his role in the robbery of a gas station and murder based on the felony murder rule. The court was deadlocked as to whether Pulido actually committed the murder, and as a result assumed that he did not. However, Pulido contended that the felony-murder instructions to the jury were defective because he could not have been convicted under the rule for aiding murderer after the crime had occurred. Additionally, a typographical error occurred under the murder-robbery special circumstances instructions to the jury, in which the substitution of “or” for “and” could have expanded the scope of the crime to allow for non-contemporaneous aiding of a robbery. As a result of the fact that these were not “harmless errors,’ his conviction was overturned

Additionally, in a second opinion the court examined the role of the prosecutor in this case, holding that the prosecutor should have known or did know of the existence of perjured testimony, with result to the testimony of Moore, which suggested Pulido acted alone in robbing the station. However in this case, the court found there could not have been any real harm done to Pulido, since the jury convicted only under the felony-murder theory, which meant they did not believe the testimony of Moore and was thus not a material error.

The issue in this case involves the search incident to arrest exception to the 4th Amendment warrant requirement. In the present case, police surveilled Gant’s house waiting for him to return home. Gant arrived home, exited his vehicle, and was arrested by the police officers. While he was handcuffed and under supervision in the back of a patrol car, and while the scene was secure, police officers conducted a warrantless search of his car and found cocaine and a firearm. Gant was convicted on this discovery and appealed. The Ct. of Appeals for Arizona reversed this conviction, and the Supreme Ct. of Arizona refused to hear the case. Subsequently the State petitioned the Supreme Court, which vacated the opinion and remanded for reconsideration in light of State v. Dean, which held that warrantless searches are not justified when arrestee is not a recent occupant at the time of arrest, the justifications for warrantless search –protection of arresting officers and preservation of evidence no longer serve as a justification. The Arizona Supreme Court upheld their previous decision, determining that since there was no danger to the officers or need to preserve evidence, nor was their any other valid exception to the warrant requirement, the search was unlawful. This decision was appealed and granted certiorari by the Supreme Court.