“Prosecutors can renege on plea deals, Supreme Court rules”: Today’s edition of The Toronto Globe and Mail contains an article that begins, “Canada’s top court has declared that prosecutors have the right to renege on a plea bargain that would have handed an impaired driver an $1,800 fine for killing a couple and injuring their child. The Supreme Court was unanimous in its decision, released Friday, the first time the justices have ruled on the discretion allowed prosecutors in plea agreements.”
You can access yesterday’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Canada at this link.
“U.S. won’t challenge $276 million judgment for PSFS investors”: This article appears today in The Philadelphia Inquirer.
“Guantanamo detainees see legal progress reversed”: Peter Finn and Del Quentin Wilber of The Washington Post have an article that begins, “The U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington has repeatedly overturned lower court decisions favoring the detainees held at Guantanamo Bay, making it increasingly unlikely that many of the men will win their freedom through legal action.”
“Beach rights lawsuit might be moot fight”: The Galveston County (Tex.) Daily News has this report.
“Area lawyers win Supreme Court case; injured railroad worker’s $275K verdict upheld”: This article appeared yesterday in The Belleville (Ill.) News-Democrat.
“Supreme Court has given firms a stronger hand; This year, it gave firms a stronger shield against class actions; But it also ruled for several individuals suing employers and made it easier for car crash victims to sue automakers”: David G. Savage will have this article Saturday in The Los Angeles Times.
“Komisarjevsky’s Lawyers Argue At Supreme Court To Keep Witness List Sealed”: The Hartford Courant has a news update that begins, “The state Supreme Court Friday heard arguments from Joshua Komisarjevsky’s attorneys who are attempting to keep the witness list in the Cheshire home invasion defendant’s upcoming trial sealed from the public before testimony begins.”
“Why this Supreme Court could be the best hope for gay-marriage advocates”: Law professor Justin Driver will have this op-ed Sunday in The Washington Post.
“Military court upholds Gitmo war crimes conviction”: The Associated Press has this report on today’s en banc ruling of the U.S. Court of Military Commission Review in the case of Salim Ahmed Hamdan.
You can access the lengthy ruling at this link (via “Lawfare” blog).
“Orie gets chance to argue appeal”: Today’s edition of The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review contains an article that begins, “The Pennsylvania Supreme Court sent Sen. Jane Orie’s double jeopardy appeal in her public corruption case back to Superior Court on Thursday in an order straightening out some tangled case law.”
You can access yesterday’s per curiam ruling of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania at this link.
“5th Circuit Judges Shrug Off Critics, Hang Onto Oil Investments”: Lawrence Hurley of Greenwire has an article (via The New York Times) that begins, “Despite criticism over perceived ties to oil and gas companies, judges of the New Orleans-based federal appeals court that frequently handles cases affecting the energy industry have made little effort to divest themselves of investments that could create conflicts of interest, according to new financial disclosure statements.”
“Appeals Court Keeps Material Witness Hearings Secret”: Mike Scarcella has this post at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times.”
And at his “Under the Radar” blog at Politico.com, Josh Gerstein has a post titled “D.C. Circuit punts on access to material witness cases.”
You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit at this link.
Access online Slate’s “Supreme Court Year in Review”: Available via this link, featuring Dahlia Lithwick, Walter Dellinger, and Paul Clement.
“Anna Nicole Smith’s Estate Loses Supreme Court Case”: Adam Liptak has this article today in The New York Times.
“High court sides with defendant in Louisville crack cocaine case”: The Louisville Courier-Journal contains this article today.
“Supreme Court Ruling Accepts No Substitutes in Crime Lab Testimony”: Adam Liptak has this article today in The New York Times.
And in today’s edition of The Los Angeles Times, David G. Savage reports that “Supreme Court puts extra burden on crime labs; Justices declare that a defendant in a drunken driving case has the right to demand that a lab technician testify in person about a test showing impairment.”
“Ex-media mogul Conrad Black ordered back to prison; wife faints”: The Chicago Sun-Times has this news update.
The Chicago Tribune has a news update headlined “Black headed back to prison; wife collapses in court.”
The Toronto Globe and Mail has a news update headlined “Conrad Black going back to prison.”
National Post has a news update headlined “Conrad Black going back to prison.”
The Associated Press reports that “Conrad Black resentenced to prison.”
Reuters reports that “Ex-media mogul Conrad Black sent back to prison.”
And Bloomberg News reports that “Judge Sends Conrad Black Back to Prison.”
Programming note: The panel in which I am participating as a speaker at the Judicial Conference of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit — on the subject “Opening Up: Can the Courts Be More Open and Better Understood?” — will be making its presentations this morning. As a result, new posts will not appear here until this afternoon.
“Supreme Court rules against Anna Nicole Smith estate”: Michael Doyle of McClatchy Newspapers has this report.
“Supreme Court says defendants may confront lab analysts who prepare reports”: Robert Barnes will have this article Friday in The Washington Post.
“Drug Makers Win Two Supreme Court Decisions”: Adam Liptak will have this article Friday in The New York Times.
And in Friday’s edition of The Washington Post, Robert Barnes will have an article headlined “Supreme Court protects generic drug-makers from being sued for lack of warning.”
Today’s West Virginia adventure: Instead of touring the “Bunker” (more information available here), I was back behind the wheel today to visit two relatively nearby stadiums that are home to minor league baseball teams that play in the Appalachian League.
My first stop was Hunnicutt Field, home to the Princeton Rays. From there, I traveled to Bluefield, a town that straddles the Virginia-West Virginia border, to visit Bowen Field, which this year will be the home of the Bluefield Blue Jays.
Coincidentally, Philadelphia Phillies manager Charlie Manuel‘s birthplace is just down the road a bit from Bluefield in West Virginia.
“Ruling: LA County needn’t mandate condoms in porn.” The Associated Press has a report that begins, “An appeals court says the courts can’t compel public health officials to require and enforce condom use in porn.”
And XBIZ.com reported last week that “L.A. Health Officials Can’t Be Forced to Regulate Porn Shoots, Court Rules.”
You can access last Thursday’s unpublished ruling of the California Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District at this link.
“Wichita doctor’s plan for abortion clinic continues amid hostility”: This article appears today in The Wichita Eagle.
“Prosecution mulling whether to retry Barry Bonds”: The San Francisco Chronicle has this news update.
And The Associated Press reports that “Feds get more time to decide on Bonds retrial.”
“Anna Nicole Smith heirs are losers in Supreme Court; A ruling by the Supreme Court favors heirs of billionaire J. Howard Marshall, the late husband of Anna Nicole Smith; Justices say a Texas probate court, rather than a California bankruptcy judge, had the authority to resolve the Marshall estate dispute”: David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has this news update.
Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Anna Nicole Smith’s Estate Loses at High Court on Fortune.”
James Vicini of Reuters reports that “Supreme Court rules against Anna Nicole Smith estate.”
And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Bankruptcy courts’ powers pared down; Anna Nicole Smith’s estate loses a plea for some $89 million from her now-deceased tycoon husband’s riches, and the specialized federal bankruptcy courts lose some of their authority in a 5-4 decision by the Court.”
“CSI meets Law & Order: Supreme Court rules lab techs must testify in court; The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the practice of permitting substitutes to testify about forensic evidence violates defendants’ constitutional rights to confront their accusers.” Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor has this report.
And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “New curb on crime lab reports; Once more divided 5-4 on how to define the right of a criminal suspect to confront accusers, the Court rules that, if a crime lab report is offered by prosecutors, the person who did the test and prepared the report must testify, and a supervisor cannot do so in the absence of that technician.”
“Makers of generic drugs don’t have to warn of new dangers, Supreme Court rules; The Supreme Court rules that makers of generics, unlike makers of brand-name drugs, do not have to warn patients of newly revealed problems; In another ruling, justices supported drug makers buying or selling prescription records from patients for ‘marketing’ purposes”: David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has this news update.
Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Generic-Drug Makers Shielded From Lawsuits, Top Court Says.”
And James Vicini of Reuters reports that “Supreme Court rejects generic drug labeling suits.”
“Railroads Lose Supreme Court Fight Over Worker Suits”: Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News has this report.
“Court strikes law restricting sale of prescription info”: Joan Biskupic of USA Today has this news update.
Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor reports that “Supreme Court strikes down law restricting sale of prescription drug info; In a closely-watched case affecting data mining and physicians’ privacy, the Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Vermont cannot stop prescription drug companies from accessing doctors’ prescription histories in order to market newer, more expensive drugs.”
And James Vicini of Reuters reports that “Supreme Court strikes down state drug data-mining law.”
Access online today’s rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court in argued cases: The Court today issued six rulings in argued cases.
1. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg delivered the opinion of the Court except as to part IV and footnote 6 in Bullcoming v. New Mexico, No. 09-10876. Justice Sonia Sotomayor issued an opinion concurring in part. And Justice Anthony M. Kennedy issued a dissenting opinion, in which the Chief Justice and Justices Stephen G. Breyer and Samuel A. Alito, Jr. joined. You can access the oral argument via this link.
2. Justice Ginsburg delivered the opinion of the Court except as to part III-A in CSX Transp., Inc. v. McBride, No. 10-235. Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Antonin Scalia, Kennedy, and Alito joined. You can access the oral argument via this link.
3. Justice Clarence Thomas delivered the opinion of the Court except as to part III-B-2 in Pliva, Inc. v. Mensing, No. 09-993. Justice Sotomayor issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, and Elena Kagan joined. You can access the oral argument via this link.
4. Justice Kennedy announced the judgment of the Court in Freeman v. United States, No. 09-10245. Justice Kennedy issued an opinion in which Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, and Kagan joined. Justice Sotomayor issued an opinion concurring in the judgment. And Chief Justice Roberts issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito joined. You can access the oral argument via this link.
5. Justice Kennedy delivered the opinion of the Court in Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc., No. 10-779. Justice Breyer issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Ginsburg and Kagan joined. You can access the oral argument via this link.
6. And Chief Justice Roberts delivered the opinion of the Court in Stern v. Marshall, No. 10-179. Justice Scalia issued a concurring opinion. And Justice Breyer issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Gibsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan joined. You can access the oral argument via this link.
In early news coverage, The Associated Press has reports headlined “Court: Generic drug makers not liable for warnings“; “Prescription drug data mining law struck down“; “Court says lab analyst must testify to own work“; “Court rules against Anna Nicole Smith’s estate“; “Court says crack convict can seek shorter term“; and “Court says man can collect damages from railroad.”
Carter, Phillips article on the impact of gender on U.S. Supreme Court oral arguments can be accessed online: Using this link, via SSRN. My earlier coverage of the article can be accessed here.
“Free to Search and Seize”: In today’s edition of The New York Times, David K. Shipler has an op-ed that begins, “This spring was a rough season for the Fourth Amendment.”
In Bashman news from Australia: The Warwick Daily News reports today that “Father and son bash man.”
“Droney Breezes Through D.C. Confirmation Hearing For 2nd Circuit”: This article appears today in The Hartford Courant.
