“There’s no evidence Jessica’s Law works, California officials say; A state board says tight residency limits on sex offenders have driven many to homelessness, which could propel them back into crime; The state spends $25 million housing some of the offenders”: The Los Angeles Times contains this article today.

“Bills seek stronger liability shield for good Samaritans in California”: This front page article appears today in The Sacramento Bee.

And law.com reports that “Calif. Lawmakers Rush to Rescue Good Samaritans in Wake of Court Ruling.”

“A Test of The Power To Unpardon: The courts should uphold Bush’s revocation of clemency to a sordid developer.” George Lardner Jr. has this op-ed today in The Washington Post.

“A Foot-Dragger Walks: A perverse legal incentive goes before the Supreme Court.” The Washington Post contains this editorial today.

“Report Cites Political and Racial Bias At Justice; Watchdogs Say Ex-Official Broke Civil Service Laws”: This article appears today in The Washington Post.

The Wall Street Journal reports today that “Probe Faults Hiring at Justice Division.”

law.com provides an article headlined “Report: Politics, Ideology Drove Hiring Decisions in Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division; Last of four reports on DOJ hiring includes complaints that lawyers were pulled off cases for being ‘treacherous’ to agenda.”

And yesterday evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered” contained an audio segment entitled “Report: Justice Official Made Politically Biased Hires” (RealPlayer required).

I linked to additional coverage and to the report itself in this post from last night.

“Detainee Tortured, Says U.S. Official; Trial Overseer Cites ‘Abusive’ Methods Against 9/11 Suspect”: Bob Woodward has this front page article today in The Washington Post.

And The New York Times reports today that “Detainee Was Tortured, a Bush Official Confirms.”

“JQC accuses Tampa judge of fiscal shenanigans with stripper”: The St. Petersburg Times today contains an article that begins, “An appeals judge who made history as Stetson University’s first black law school graduate is in trouble with the state Judicial Qualifications Commission, accused of taking gifts from a stripper and helping hide her assets from creditors.”

And The Tampa Tribune reports today that “Judge Charged In Stripper Inquiry.”

You can access at this link the formal charges filed yesterday by the Investigative Panel of the Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission.

“Holder may reverse Bush secrecy”: Pete Yost of The Associated Press provides this report.

Today’s edition of The Los Angeles Times contains an editorial entitled “Eric Holder’s challenge: Atty. Gen.-nominee Eric Holder was a key Obama advisor; Now he must put politics aside.”

And CBS News legal analyst Andrew Cohen has a “CourtWatch” column headlined “A Nation Looks For Candor At Justice; The Only Suspense In AG Nominee Eric Holder’s Confirmation Hearing Is Whether He Answers The Tough Questions.”

“Paterson Picks Chief Judge Nominee”: Today’s edition of The New York Times contains an article that begins, “Gov. David A. Paterson nominated Justice Jonathan Lippman on Tuesday to be the next chief judge of the New York Court of Appeals, the state’s highest court.”

And law.com provides a report headlined “Sources: Lippman Chosen for N.Y. Chief Judge Slot.”

“Justices Turn to Rights of Defendants”: Adam Liptak has this article today in The New York Times.

“Gableman loses request to bar commission from continuing case”: The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel today contains an article that begins, “A three-judge panel considering an ethics complaint against state Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman on Tuesday dismissed a request by Gableman that the state Judicial Commission be barred from continuing its case. The Judicial Commission filed allegations against Gableman in October claiming he knowingly lied in a campaign ad last spring. A three-judge panel is now reviewing the allegations; the panel will forward its findings to the Supreme Court to decide what punishment, if any, Gableman should face.”

“Report Finds Online Threats to Children Overblown”: The New York Times today contains an article that begins, “The Internet may not be such a dangerous place for children after all. A task force created by 49 state attorneys general to look into the problem of sexual solicitation of children online has concluded that there really is not a significant problem.”

And today’s edition of The Wall Street Journal contains an article headlined “No Easy Answer for Protecting Kids Online; Study Finds Risks Children Face on the Web Aren’t Too Different From Real-World Problems.”

The task force’s report can be accessed via the web site of the Internet Safety Technical Task Force.

“Bush pushed the limits of presidential power: With Cheney’s urging, he insisted that he had that right under the US Constitution, especially during wartime.” Warren Richey has this article today in The Christian Science Monitor.

Perhaps that’s why they’re U.S. Supreme Court Justices drafters of U.S. Supreme Court syllabi rather than mathematicians: A reader who is currently based at Bagram Air Field in Afghanistan emails to point out that the syllabus of yesterday’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Jimenez v. Quarterman, No. 07-6984, contains a rather obvious math error. that’s repeated three times (once in the unanimous majority opinion, at page 4, and twice in first paragraph of the syllabus).

My correspondent emails:

In the opening syllabus paragraph of Jimenez vs. Quarterman, the line,

“Petitioner filed a second state habeas application on December 6, 2004, which was denied 355 days later, on June 29, 2005.”

Whoops. In the military we frequently use “Julian Dates” which are quite helpful in counting spans of days.

December 6 in 2004 (a leap year) was 341 out of 366, and June 29, 2005 was 180.

So the actual span of days was 180 + (366-341) = “205 days later.” So, it seems unlikely to be a mere typo.

“355 days later” would have been November 26, 2005.

Thanks much to my Bagram-based reader for sending this along.

Update: Contrary to a mistake that I interjected into my original post, the Court’s opinion is not in error, as another reader has kindly emailed to note:

With regard to your Jimenez v. Quarterman post at 8:04a today, I note that the majority opinion, at page 4, does not contain the math error in the syllabus, contrary to the post’s statement. The opinion states that “less than one year of included time” (emphasis added) passed between January 6, 2004, and July 19, 2005. “Included” there means “counted against the limitations period,” and that’s correct: there were 560 actual calendar days between January 6, 2004 and July 19, 2005. The post-conviction petition was pending from December 6, 2004 through June 29, 2005, which is 205 days, and the habeas petitioner argued that those days were not counted against the limitations period. 560 – 205 = 355 “included” days.

Thanks much to this reader pointing out that I, in my original post, overstated the extent of the error.

“Judge panel will reopen Kent misconduct case; Lastest sex abuse allegations prompt more investigation”: This article appears today in The Houston Chronicle.

And law.com reports that “5th Circuit Reopens Federal District Judge Probe.”

My earlier coverage of this development appeared in this post from Monday night.

“Obama, Biden, to visit Supreme Court Wednesday”: The Associated Press provides this report.

“Bush appointee saw Justice lawyers as ‘commies,’ ‘crazy libs,’ report says; Bradley Schlozman, who supervised civil rights and voting rights lawyers, broke the law by considering political affiliations in deciding who can serve, an inspector general’s report says”: David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has this news update.

Wednesday in The New York Times, Eric Lichtblau will have an article headlined “Criticism of Ex-Official in Hiring at Justice Dept.”

And McClatchy Newspapers reports that “Internal probe slams Bush Justice official for illegal hiring.”

You can access at this link the report that the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Inspector General made public today.

“Evidence in Terror Cases Said to Be in Chaos; Military Officials Reject Ex-Prosecutor’s Charges”: Wednesday’s edition of The Washington Post will contain an article that begins, “A former military prosecutor said in a declaration filed in federal court yesterday that the system of handling evidence against detainees at Guantanamo Bay was so chaotic that it was impossible to prepare a fair and successful prosecution.”

“Just In: Obama and Biden Will Visit Supreme Court Wednesday.” Tony Mauro has this post at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times.”

“Court restores restrictions on W.Va. gambling advertising”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “A federal appeals court reinstated West Virginia’s video lottery advertising restrictions Tuesday, ruling that the state has a legitimate interest in raising money without contributing to compulsive gambling.”

You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit at this link.

“Paterson nominates Lippman NY chief judge”: The AP provides this report.

“Judicial council to reopen probe of federal judge”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “A judicial panel that once suspended a federal judge accused of sexually abusing court workers said it will reopen its investigation now that new counts have been added to the criminal case.”

My earlier coverage of this development appeared in this post from last night.

The Associated Press forgets that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit rarely grants rehearing en banc even in cases that actually deserve it: The AP reports that “AP appeals ruling that Lindh petition is private.”

My earlier coverage of the Second Circuit’s three-judge panel ruling in this matter can be accessed here.

Technically speaking, a Guantanamo case was indeed argued today at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit: A law librarian emails:

I thought you’d want to know that the Guantanamo Bay-related case that took place today in the Federal Circuit’s courtroom was actually a case heard by the U. S. Court of Military Commission Review. Here is a link to the announcement from that tribunal.

The Federal Circuit simply provided a venue for the hearing.

Providing further evidence (as though any were needed) that law librarians are the best!

In coverage of today’s hearing, Jesse J. Holland of The Associated Press reports that “Court hears arguments over detainee’s confession.” My related post from earlier today can be accessed here.

“Impeach Jay Bybee: Why should a suspected war criminal serve as a federal judge?” Law professor Bruce Ackerman has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Supreme Court reviews speedy trial issue”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press provides this report.

“Court limits ‘violent felony’ definition”: Lyle Denniston has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Court limits use of law aimed at career criminals.”

Access online today’s two opinions of the U.S. Supreme Court in argued cases: You can access today’s ruling in Chambers v. United States, No. 06-11206, at this link. In addition, the oral argument transcript can be accessed here.

And you can access today’s ruling in Jimenez v. Quarterman, No. 07-6984, at this link. In addition, the oral argument transcript can be accessed here.

“Democratic Lawmakers May Investigate Bush Years”: This audio segment (RealPlayer required) appeared on today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition.”

“Obama to sign order next week to close Guantanamo prison”: McClatchy Newspapers provide this report.

The Wall Street Journal reports today that “Obama Will Issue Executive Order Within First Week to Shut Guantanamo.”

Carol Rosenberg of The Miami Herald reports that “Rights groups alarmed by Obama’s pace on Gitmo.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Closing Gitmo requires tough judgments on inmates.”

“Supreme Court deals setback to cable TV firms on video recording; Companies want to offer customers a service that doesn’t require a set-top box; The court asks the Justice Department to determine whether it would violate the Copyright Act”: David G. Savage has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

“Court keeps the lid on governor’s Katz e-mail; Reversal on appeal upholds claim of executive privilege”: The Newark (N.J.) Star-Ledger contains this article today.

You can access yesterday’s ruling of the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, at this link.

“Weighing Reach of Law in Appeals for Clemency”: Today in The New York Times, Adam Liptak has an article that begins, “In an unusually testy argument, the Supreme Court on Monday tried to make sense of a federal law that provides lawyers to poor inmates on state death rows when their cases move to federal court. The question for the justices was whether the law also requires the federal government to pay those lawyers to present clemency petitions to governors and other state officials.”

You can access the transcript of yesterday’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Harbison v. Bell, No. 07-8521, at this link.

“Court to hear arguments over detainee’s confession”: Jesse J. Holland of The Associated Press has a report that begins, “Pentagon prosecutors want a federal appeals court to reinstate a young Guantanamo detainee’s confession after a military judge, who ruled the man had been tortured, threw it out. Military prosecutors on Tuesday were to ask the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to allow them to use Mohammed Jawad’s confession against him during his trial by military commission.”

Chances are that the appeal is being heard by the D.C. Circuit, and not the Federal Circuit.

“Solicitor General Pick Has One Glaring Gap on Resume”: Tony Mauro has this article in today’s issue of Legal Times.