Friday, November 17, 2017
Court: No right to copy court reporter’s recordings
Georgia’s highest court says the makers of a popular podcast series do not
have the right to copy audio recordings made during a murder trial by a
court reporter.
The second season of the “Undisclosed” podcast featured the case of Joey
Watkins, who was convicted of murder and other crimes for his role in the
January 2000 slaying of Isaac Dawkins in northwest Georgia. He was
sentenced to serve life plus five years in prison.
Undisclosed LLC argued the recordings are court records, and rules
governing the courts provide for the right to copy court records.
Georgia Supreme Court Justice Nels Peterson wrote in an opinion published
Monday that, under common law, court records include only materials filed
with the court. The recordings at issue weren’t filed with the court.
Wednesday, August 16, 2017
Court lifts order blocking Arkansas abortion pill law
A federal appeals court panel has lifted an order blocking restrictions on how the abortion pill is administered in Arkansas, saying a judge didn't estimate how many women would be burdened by the law's requirements.
The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel on Friday vacated U.S. District Court Judge Kristine Baker's preliminary injunction against the 2015 law. The measure requires doctors providing the pill to maintain a contract with another physician with admitting privileges at a hospital who agrees to handle any complications.
The panel said Baker should look into the number of women who would be unduly burdened by the contracting physician requirement and whether it amounts to a "large fraction" of women seeking the abortion pill in Arkansas.
Tuesday, August 15, 2017
Wyoming raises court fees for courtroom technology updates
An increase in court automation fees approved by the state Legislature aims to provide Wyoming courtrooms with adequate technology.
The Wyoming Tribune Eagle reports people using Wyoming courts since July 1 have had to pay $15 more in automation fees than they did before. The fees are for filing probate and civil matters in district court, filing civil matters in circuit court and filing petitions in the state Supreme Court.
People also have to pay $25 instead of $20 if they have been found guilty in a criminal case or are placed on probation.
State agencies that are parties in a legal proceeding are exempt until July 2018.
Wyoming Court Administrator Lily Sharpe says the money will primarily help update audio and visual systems in 69 courtrooms across the state.
Friday, June 16, 2017
Indiana governor names Judge Goff to state Supreme Court
Indiana's next state Supreme Court justice, Wabash County Superior Court Judge Christopher Goff, said Monday his appointment to the state's highest court is humbling beyond words and something he never would have imagined at the start of his legal career.
Goff's selection to fill the vacancy created by Justice Robert Rucker's retirement was announced by Gov. Eric Holcomb. The governor said Goff, 45, "will bring his unique voice and experiences" from his years in rural Indiana to the five-member court when he becomes its youngest member.
"Judge Goff grew up in a working class neighborhood and has spent most of his life living in a rural county, which will complement his colleagues on the bench with their own deep roots in other urban and suburban regions of the state," Holcomb said at his Statehouse announcement.
He selected Goff over the two other finalists for the vacancy chosen by Indiana's Judicial Nominating Commission: Boone Superior Court Judge Matthew Kincaid and Clark Circuit Court Judge Vicki Carmichael. Twenty people had applied for the vacancy.
Groups sue seeking court oversight of Chicago police reforms
Several leading community groups filed a class-action lawsuit against the city of Chicago Wednesday in a bid to bypass or even scuttle a draft agreement between the city and the U.S. Department of Justice that seeks to reform the nation's second largest police force without federal court oversight.
The more than 100-page lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Chicago argues that an overhaul of Chicago's 12,000-officer force in the wake of a damning civil rights report in January can't work without the intense scrutiny of a court-appointed monitor answerable to a judge.
"Absent federal court supervision, nothing will improve," the lawsuit says. "It is clear that federal court intervention is essential to end the historical and on-going pattern and practice of excessive force by police officers in Chicago."
While President Donald Trump's attorney general, Jeff Sessions, has expressed skepticism about court involvement, President Barack Obama's administration saw it as vital to successful reforms. Obama's Justice Department typically took a city reform plan to a judge to make it legally binding in the form of a consent decree.
Wednesday's lawsuit — which names Black Lives Matters Chicago among the plaintiffs — asks for a federal court to intervene and order sweeping reforms to end the "abusive policies and practices undergirding the alleged constitutional and state law violations."
Mayor Rahm Emanuel's administration said earlier this month that a draft deal negotiated by the city and the Justice Department — one that foresees a monitor not selected by a court — is being reviewed in Washington. Justice Department spokesman Devin O'Malle cautioned last week that "there is no agreement at this time."
A lead attorney in the new lawsuit, Craig Futterman, a University of Chicago law professor and outspoken advocate for far-reaching police reforms, said in a telephone interview that reports about the draft influenced the decision to sue now.
President Donald Trump is making his first Supreme Court visit at a moment of high legal drama. The justices are weighing what to do with the president's ban on travelers from six mostly Muslim countries. But the reason for his high court trip Thursday is purely ceremonial, to mark Justice Neil Gorsuch's ascension to the bench.
Trump has no role in the courtroom ceremony, but presidents often make the trip to the court from the White House to honor their nominees. While the dispute over the travel ban and other controversies have simmered during Trump's first few months in office, his choice of the 49-year-old Gorsuch for the Supreme Court won widespread praise in the legal community as well as unanimous Republican support in the Senate.
A federal judge first blocked Trump's initial travel ban in early February. The president issued a revised version in March. It never took effect after judges in Maryland and Hawaii put it on hold. Two federal appeals courts have since upheld those lower court orders.
The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to allow the ban to take effect immediately. Gorsuch actually has been a member of the high court since April, and he even issued his first opinion on Monday.
The investiture ceremony typically takes place before a new justice's first day on the bench, but Gorsuch was confirmed and sworn in on a tight schedule.
He filled the seat that had been held for nearly 30 years by Justice Antonin Scalia, who died in February 2016. The high court seat was vacant for nearly 14 months after Senate Republicans refused to take up President Barack Obama's nomination of Judge Merrick Garland.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)