At midnight, this blog is moving to its new online home: Following two wonderful years during which this blog was hosted at the Legal Affairs web site, effective Thursday, April 20, 2006 “How Appealing” will be hosted by law.com. This blog’s new address effective at midnight is http://howappealing.law.com. Please adjust your bookmarks accordingly.
Also moving to law.com will be this blog’s entire archives, stretching back to May 6, 2002, and this blog’s “20 questions for the appellate judge” interview archives.
I wish all of my friends at Legal Affairs all the best for the future, and I thank them for their kindness over the past two years. At the same time, I am very much looking forward to the next two years — and perhaps longer — during which time “How Appealing” will be hosted by law.com.
My most sincere thanks of all, however, are reserved for this blog’s readers, because without you this blog would not continue to exist. I thank you for reading, and I hope you will visit often at this blog’s new address.
“Under these circumstances, we determine that we are most faithful to the Fourth Amendment and to the doctrine of the regulatory search exception to the warrant requirement if we conclude that this search and seizure are constitutionally infirm and exclude the fruits of the search and seizure.” The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit issued this interesting regulatory search-Fourth Amendment decision today. The decision vacates the criminal conviction of the defendant, who was found to be in possession of twenty-three kilograms of cocaine hidden amidst building materials in his truck’s bed.
“The real Al-Arian: In the plea deal signed by Sami Al-Arian, the former USF professor is revealed as a moral and academic fraud who helped jihadists and then lied about it.” This editorial appears today in The St. Petersburg Times.
Available online from National Public Radio: This evening’s broadcast of “All Things Considered” contained segments entitled “Insanity Defense Tested in Supreme Court” (featuring Nina Totenberg) and “On Stand, Skilling Accused of Covering Millions in Losses.”
And today’s broadcast of “Day to Day” contained segments entitled “Slate’s Jurisprudence: Moussaoui’s Insanity Defense” (featuring Dahlia Lithwick) and “Taking the Stand, Skilling Denies Accounting Fraud.”
RealPlayer is required to launch these audio segments.
“A Collection of Law Review Articles Citing Legal Blogs”: At “3L Epiphany,” Ian Best has compiled this list.
Second Circuit holds that U.S. Parole Commission erred in imposing sentence of life imprisonment without parole on a U.S. citizen convicted of murder in the United Kingdom and transferred to the United States to serve his sentence: Under the sentence imposed in the United Kingdom, the prisoner would have been eligible for parole after serving a sentence of twenty-four years of imprisonment. You can access today’s interesting ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit at this link.
“Each of the plaintiffs’ separate copyrighted works constitutes one work for purposes of § 504(c)(1), and accordingly the defendants’ infringement of thirteen copyrights by copying thirteen songs onto seven distinct CD products warrants thirteen statutory damage awards.” The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit today issued this ruling in favor of WB Music Corp. and various other plaintiffs that had filed suit alleging copyright infringement.
Issuing tomorrow from the Supreme Court of California: Thanks to a California-based reader and friend, I see that tomorrow the Supreme Court of California plans to issue its much-anticipated ruling in Lyle v. Warner Brothers Television Productions. According to that court’s announcement, the case presents the questions:
Can the use of sexually coarse and vulgar language in the workplace (here, production of the Friends television show) constitute harassment based on sex within the meaning of the Fair Employment & Housing Act (FEHA) (Gov. Code, §12900 et seq.)? Does the potential imposition of liability under FEHA for sexual harassment based on such speech infringe on defendants’ rights of free speech under the First Amendment or the state Constitution?
The court plans to post the opinion online at 10 a.m. pacific time tomorrow.
“No-knock case to be re-argued”: Lyle Denniston has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”
And The Associated Press reports that “Supreme Court to Debate Police Searches.”
Today’s order of the U.S. Supreme Court granting reargument in Hudson v. Michigan can be accessed here. You can access the transcript of the original oral argument in that case, from earlier this Term, at this link.
“High Court Examines Insanity Defense”: law.com’s Tony Mauro provides this report.
Gina Holland of The Associated Press reports that “Supreme Court Takes Up Insanity Defense.”
And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Analysis: A focus on intent.”
Programming note: I’ll be departing momentarily to attend a family gathering for my nephew who was born eight days ago. Additional posts will appear here later today.
View the redesigned web page of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit: The redesign unveiled today can be accessed here.
“Judge says monument shall stay at courthouse; Marker on lawn is ruled as secular”: This article appears today in The Toledo Blade.
And The Associated Press reports that “Judge Says Ten Commandments Can Stay.”
I have uploaded a copy of yesterday’s ruling of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio at this link.
“How We Pick Our Judges: A View from the Inside.” This event — moderated by Second Circuit Judge Richard C. Wesley and featuring Leonard Leo and Eleanor Acheson — will be held tomorrow afternoon at Cornell Law School. The event is open to the public.
On today’s broadcast of NPR‘s “Morning Edition“: The broadcast contained segments entitled “High Court Reviews Insanity-Defense Case” (featuring Nina Totenberg); “Moussaoui Defense Paints Picture of Mental Instability“; and “Skilling Continues to Assert Innocence at Enron Trial.” RealPlayer is required to launch these audio files.
“High court to examine insanity defense; Outcome of the Arizona challenge may impact cases elsewhere, such as Andrea Yates'”: Patty Reinert has this article today in The Houston Chronicle.
“Skilling’s Temper Is Tested in Day 2 Under Fire”: This article appears today in The New York Times.
The Washington Post reports today that “Skilling’s Temper Drawn Out on Stand; Prosecutor Focuses on What Former Enron CEO Says He Doesn’t Remember.”
The Los Angeles Times reports that “Skilling Is Grilled on Accounting; Enron’s former CEO denies suggesting that subordinates dip into reserves or hide possible losses to meet or beat Wall Street targets.”
In The Houston Chronicle, Mary Flood reports that “Skilling is testy on the stand; Reserves were ‘absolutely not’ used as cookie jar, he says.”
And USA Today reports that “Enron’s Skilling loses his cool on witness stand; Defendant becomes argumentative.”
“Witness Says Moussaoui Exhibited Mental Illness”: Neil A. Lewis has this article today in The New York Times.
The Washington Post reports today that “Psychologist Tells Court Moussaoui Is Delusional; Unpleasant Encounter in Cell Is Described.”
The Los Angeles Times reports that “Moussaoui Is Insane, Psychologist Testifies.”
And The Richmond Times-Dispatch reports that “Expert calls Moussaoui mentally ill; Testifying for the defense, a psychologist says his acts indicate schizophrenia.”
“Judge rules against Kline in teen-sex case”: The Wichita Eagle today contains an article that begins, “Kansas’ chief law enforcement officer misread the law and in doing so threatened the sexual privacy of the state’s teenagers, a federal judge in Wichita ruled Tuesday.”
And The New York Times reports today that “Judge Blocks Law to Report Sex Under 16.”
“Appeal of Skid Row Ruling Is Urged; LAPD’s Chief Bratton wants the city attorney to challenge a court decision barring the arrest of homeless who sleep on sidewalks”: This article appears today in The Los Angeles Times.
“Justices Hear Case on Right to Choose Defense Counsel”: Linda Greenhouse has this article today in The New York Times.
“Court to Consider Test of Insanity Defense”: Gina Holland of The Associated Press provides this report.
