|
|
|
Supreme Court tosses $315 million award in USS Cole lawsuit
Legal Interview |
2019/03/21 11:07
|
The Supreme Court on Tuesday threw out a nearly $315 million judgment against Sudan stemming from the USS Cole bombing, saying Sudan hadn't properly been notified of the lawsuit.
The justices ruled 8-1 that notice of the lawsuit should have been mailed to Sudan's foreign ministry in the country's capital, Khartoum. The notice was instead mailed to Sudan's embassy in Washington.
The lawsuit in which the justices ruled involves sailors who were injured in the 2000 bombing of the Cole in Yemen. Sailors and their spouses sued Sudan in a U.S. court, arguing that Sudan had provided support to al-Qaida, which claimed responsibility for the Cole attack. Seventeen sailors died when the ship was struck by a bomb-laden boat. Dozens of others were injured.
In order to alert Sudan to the lawsuit, the group mailed the required notice to Sudan's embassy in Washington. Sudan didn't initially respond to the lawsuit in court, and a judge entered an approximately $315 million judgment against the country. Sudan then tried to get the judgment thrown out.
Sudan and the sailors who were suing disagreed about the requirements of a 1976 law, the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. The statute lays out how to properly notify another country of a lawsuit filed in a U.S. court. If other agreements between the countries don't exist, the law says that notice should be "addressed and dispatched ... to the head of the ministry of foreign affairs of the foreign state concerned."
Lawyers for Sudan and for the U.S. government had argued that the best reading of that phrase is that it requires the notice to be sent to the foreign minister in the foreign country. The Supreme Court agreed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court: Constitutional ban on high fines applies to states
Legal Interview |
2019/02/21 02:09
|
The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Wednesday that the Constitution's ban on excessive fines applies to the states, an outcome that could help efforts to rein in police seizure of property from criminal suspects.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote the court's opinion in favor of Tyson Timbs, of Marion, Indiana. Police seized Timbs' $40,000 Land Rover when they arrested him for selling about $400 worth of heroin.
Reading a summary of her opinion in the courtroom, Ginsburg noted that governments employ fines "out of accord with the penal goals of retribution and deterrence" because fines are a source of revenue. The 85-year-old justice missed arguments last month following lung cancer surgery, but returned to the bench on Tuesday.
Timbs pleaded guilty, but faced no prison time. The biggest loss was the Land Rover he bought with some of the life insurance money he received after his father died.
Timbs still has to win one more round in court before he gets his vehicle back, but that seems to be a formality. A judge ruled that taking the car was disproportionate to the severity of the crime, which carries a maximum fine of $10,000. But Indiana's top court said the justices had never ruled that the Eighth Amendment's ban on excessive fines — like much of the rest of the Bill of Rights — applies to states as well as the federal government.
The case drew interest from liberal groups concerned about police abuses and conservative organizations opposed to excessive regulation. Timbs was represented by the libertarian public interest law firm Institute for Justice.
"The decision is an important first step for curtailing the potential for abuse that we see in civil forfeiture nationwide," said Sam Gedge, a lawyer with the Institute for Justice.
Law enforcement authorities have dramatically increased their use of civil forfeiture in recent decades. When law enforcement seizes the property of people accused of crimes, the proceeds from its sale often go directly to the agency that took it, the law firm said in written arguments in support of Timbs. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court upholds order to unseal records in brazen lynching
Legal Interview |
2019/02/10 01:54
|
A historian who has spent years looking into the unsolved lynching of two black couples in rural Georgia more than 70 years ago hopes some answers may finally be within his grasp.
A federal appeals court on Monday upheld a lower court ruling to unseal the transcripts of the grand jury proceedings that followed a monthslong investigation into the killings.
Roger and Dorothy Malcom and George and Mae Murray Dorsey were riding in a car that was stopped by a white mob at Moore's Ford Bridge, overlooking the Apalachee River, in July 1946. They were pulled from the car and shot multiple times along the banks of the river.
Amid a national outcry over the slayings, President Harry Truman sent the FBI to rural Walton County, just over 50 miles (80 kilometers) east of Atlanta. Agents investigated for months and identified dozens of possible suspects, but a grand jury convened in December 1946 failed to indict anyone.
Anthony Pitch, who wrote a 2016 book on the lynching — "The Last Lynching: How a Gruesome Mass Murder Rocked a Small Georgia Town" — has sought access to the grand jury proceedings, hoping they may shed some light on what happened. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Man accused of kidnapping Wisconsin girl to appear in court
Legal Interview |
2019/02/05 10:54
|
A man accused of kidnapping a 13-year-old Wisconsin girl and killing her parents is scheduled to appear in court Wednesday for a preliminary hearing.
Jake Patterson, 21, is accused of killing James and Denise Closs on Oct. 15 and kidnapping their daughter , Jayme Closs, from their Barron home. Jayme escaped on Jan. 10, after 88 days.
Patterson is expected to be in the courtroom Wednesday, according to Sheriff Chris Fitzgerald. The purpose of a preliminary hearing is to determine whether there's grounds for a trial. Both sides can present evidence.
According to the criminal complaint, Patterson told investigators he knew Jayme "was the girl he was going to take" after he saw her getting on a school bus near her home. He made two aborted trips to the family's home before carrying out the attack in which he killed Jayme's mother in front of her.
In the days that followed, thousands of people volunteered to search for Jayme. Investigators believe Patterson hid Jayme in a remote cabin in Gordon, about 60 miles (97 kilometers) north of Barron, before she escaped and got help from a woman walking her dog.
Jayme told police that on the night she was abducted, she awoke to her dog's barking, then woke her parents as a car came up the driveway. Her father went to the front door as Jayme and her mother hid in a bathtub, according to the complaint. Jayme told police she heard a gunshot and knew her dad had been killed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Latest: Man in California officer killing in court
Legal Interview |
2019/01/01 15:38
|
A man charged with the killing of police officer in Northern California made his first court appearance but did not enter a plea. The Modesto Bee reports Gustavo Perez Arriaga told the judge Wednesday his true name is Paulo Virgen Mendoza.
His attorney questioned his mental competency, prompting the court to suspend the case until Perez Arriaga gets a mental evaluation.
Perez Arriaga was arrested Friday in the Dec. 26 shooting of Newman police Cpl. Ronil Singh during a traffic stop. The 33-year-old Singh is survived by a wife and 5-month-old son.
A man charged with the killing of police officer in Northern California made his first court appearance but did not enter a plea. The Modesto Bee reports Gustavo Perez Arriaga told the judge Wednesday his true name is Paulo Virgen Mendoza.
His attorney questioned his mental competency, prompting the court to suspend the case until Perez Arriaga gets a mental evaluation.
Perez Arriaga was arrested Friday in the Dec. 26 shooting of Newman police Cpl. Ronil Singh during a traffic stop. The 33-year-old Singh is survived by a wife and 5-month-old son.
Authorities say Perez Arriaga was in the country illegally and had previous arrests for driving under the influence of alcohol. Authorities say he was planning to flee to Mexico. President Trump cited the case while calling for tougher border security.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Del. Man Acquitted of Drug Charges Won't Get Seized Money
Legal Interview |
2018/12/30 15:39
|
A court has ruled that a Delaware man acquitted of drug charges won't get the thousands of dollars seized in the drug bust back.
WBOC media partner the Delaware State News reports that the Superior Court ruling issued last week says Jeffrey Crippen isn't entitled to the $13,584 because of the lack of documentation and proof that the money was legitimately earned.
Dover police had searched Crippen's home in 2015. According to the Delaware Department of Justice, Crippen was acquitted of drug charges but sentenced to 10 years in prison for weapons charges.
The court also said that the initial confiscation of the three bundles of cash was allowed based on legitimate probable cause.
Crippen represented himself in the petition case. The report didn't include comment from him. |
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
