Results matching “first”

From Fox News:

HONOLULU (AP) — A 65-year-old first-time drug offender on the Big Island is facing a maximum 20-year sentence.

The case against farmer David Finley of Volcano involves possession of more than 75 pounds of marijuana. Police say they also found nearly 200 marijuana plants in greenhouses on Finley's 29-acre ranch, along with other drugs.

Circuit Judge Glen Hara has sentenced Finley to two maximum 20-year sentences to be served simultaneously. He said any other sentence would undermine respect for the law and hurt society.

But the judge said he is convinced Finley is not an evil person. He was arrested Jan. 29, 2007 and already has served 14 months in jail.

The judge said marijuana is fully entrenched in the Big Island way of life with many people starting to use it before they are teenagers.

Make of it what you will.

Robot Bums-Rush. AP writer Greg Bluestein has this story about a homemade remote controlled robot built by ex-marine Rufus Terrill. The 300 pound waist high robot marked “security” patrols the street in front of his Atlanta bar after dark, running off vagrants with bright lights, a loudspeaker and a water cannon. The electronic vigilante has enraged neighborhood activists, but Terrill assures that his actions are innocent. He believes the police now patrol more, the parks are safer and there have been no break-ins since the robot hit the streets last September.

Virginia v. Moore: The Associated Press has this take on today's decision to uphold a police search even though the arrest turned out to be improper.

Technicality Puts Lifer on Parole The Charlotte Observer reports that North Carolina murderer Ronald Earl Small was approved for parole after serving a life sentence given to him in 1977 for first-degree murder and assault. Small confessed to brutally beating Alexandria Hill, 18, for refusing to have sex with him in September 1976. Days later she died from her injuries. Because he was convicted before 1994, when the state revised its sentencing laws, Small was eligible for release on parole.

Adam Liptak has this article in the New York Times today on the controversy over incarceration rates and how ours is so much higher than Europe's. The article begins with the usual stuff we hear all the time. Later, it quotes Paul Cassell and an article of ours for the proposition that locking up criminals really has saved a lot of people from victimization. The articles cites "specialists" for "dismiss[ing] race as an important distinguishing factor." That is significant, and unusual, as for some folks race seems to be the explanation of first resort on every conceivable subject.

One point I would have liked to see expanded on is this: "From 1981 to 1996, according to Justice Department statistics, the risk of punishment rose in the United States and fell in England. The crime rates predictably moved in the opposite directions, falling in the United States and rising in England."

As noted on this blog Monday, the comparative data are more dramatic than that. Liptak notes elsewhere in the article that the United States has (present tense) lower burglary and robbery rates than England, but omits the fact that this is a fairly recent development. Americans have gone from a much greater risk of these crimes, compared to England and France, to a significantly lower risk. The tougher sentencing has been a big part of that.

Today's Supreme Court oral arguments in Giles v. California started and ended well for the Petitioner, Giles, a man who was convicted for the first degree murder of his former girlfriend Brenda Avie. In today's arguments, Petitioner contested the admissibility of a testimonial statement Avie had made to police officers following a domestic dispute between the Petitioner and Avie. The domestic dispute occurred sometime before Giles shot Avie in what he claimed was self-defense. At Giles' murder trial, the California court allowed the officer to testify about Avie's statements. The statements were admitted under California's rules of evidence as evidence of Giles' propensity to commit acts of domestic violence.

Mumia Abu-Jamal: Steven D. Levitt, at Freakonomics Blog authored this post, cautioning against the uninformed support of convicted murderer Mumia Abu-Jamal. Mumia Abu-Jamal was convicted and sentenced to death for the murder of police officer Daniel Faulkner in 1981. The federal district court granted habeas relief as to the death sentence but denied relief on the guilt verdict. The Third Circuit affirmed last month in this decision. Levitt's post encourages those who support Mumia to read Murdered by Mumia written by Maureen Faulkner and Michael Smerconish. Maureen Faulkner is Daniel Faulkner's widow, and offers a victim's perspective of the Mumia legal battle. Levitt writes: "If you are a college student, or a Hollywood celebrity, thinking about publicly proclaiming Abu-Jamal’s innocence, I strongly recommend that you read this book first."

Giles Argument: Lyle Denniston reports at SCOTUSblog on today's argument regarding the Confrontation Clause and the murdered witness.

Baze Comments: Volokh Conspirator Paul Cassell has this clarification to his earlier comment on Justice Stevens' opinion in Baze, with links to his prior posts and Orin Kerr's in the same blog.

Genetic Informants. Washington Post writer Ellen Nakashima reports on a new tool that is helping to identify suspects through a relative's DNA. The initial use of this tool was in the BTK murder case. Police in Kansas obtained a court order to collect a pap smear sample from Dennis Rader's daughter, which eventually lead to his arrest for the killings in 2005. The ACLU is mostly against this.

Update on Court denials of DP appeals
Updating our earlier post, the AP’s Michael Graczyk
reports, on the three DP cases denied by the Court this morning.

Giles v. California
Oral argument will be held in Giles tomorrow. An AP story by reporter Mark Sherman discusses the case. Giles was sentenced to 50 years in prison for the first-degree murder of Brenda Avie, based in part on the introduction of statements the victim made before she died. Giles argues that introducing the statements violated the Sixth Amendment. California Attorney General Jerry Brown wants the high court to uphold the conviction.

More DNA: The federal government plans to begin DNA testing of everyone arrested by a federal law enforcement agency, rather than only after conviction, as noted previously here. The John Birch Society is against it, and the ACLU agrees. "A Chicago study in 2005 found that 53 murders and rapes could have been prevented if a DNA sample had been collected upon arrest," according to the AP story.

Last October, the Supreme Court denied certiorari and a stay in Earl Berry's case from the Mississippi Supreme Court but then granted a stay in his federal § 1983 case from the Fifth Circuit. Previous posts are here and here. By its terms, that stay terminates automatically if the certiorari petition is denied.

Berry's certiorari petition, No. 07-7348, is now on conference for tomorrow. A decision on it will probably be announced Monday. Lyle Denniston at SCOTUSblog has this post and Berry's supplemental brief, noting differences between Mississippi's protocol and Kentucky's.

But the judgment Berry wants reviewed wasn't decided on the merits.

The reasons for the United States' crime drop in the 1990s have been the subject of considerable debate. As noted here, tough sentencing policies are one major reason, with even the anti-punishment side's experts grudgingly conceding that tough sentencing caused more than a quarter of the drop. Other estimates are higher.

One of the most controversial* hypotheses is that of Donohue and Levitt that the legalization of abortion by the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) was actually a major factor. See Donohue & Levitt (2001) The Impact of Legalized Abortion on Crime, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2, 379-420.

A new study of English data challenges that hypothesis.

Death Penalty Methods. AP writer Joe Milicia reported Tuesday that lethal injections are on hold nationally while the Supreme Court considers a challenge in the case from Kentucky. Dr. Mark Dershwitz testified in a hearing saying the process of execution in Ohio was not inhumane, while Dr. Mark Heath says the method is unfit to euthanize a dog. The major claim is that the inmate could suffer from too much pain if not enough anesthetic is administered or there are mistakes injecting the drugs.

Threat maker Found. After years of searching for the racially motivated threat maker, he has been identified. David Tuason, from Cleveland, is alleged to have targeted black men that dated white women. In one of his letters he threatened to blow up the U.S. Supreme Court. A Supreme Court Spokeswoman confirmed that Justice Clarence Thomas was one of Tuason’s victims. The one trait all had in common: they were black.

Virginia: New DUI law
Register-Herald News reporter Mannix Porterfield writes that a West Virginia new law has tougher penalties on drunken drivers. The law will require anyone with a blood alcohol content (BAC) of .15 or higher to have mandatory jail time of two days to six months. Also, anyone with a BAC lower then .14 will have an alcohol ignition device installed in their car known as the Interlock. National MADD director Glynn Birch says, “The new law would “absolutely” lower the number of accidents involving drunken motorists.”

Arizona has the Nation’s toughest drunken driving law
According to the Arizona Republic, DUI first time offenders have an alcohol ignition device installed in their car for a year and when the offender is driving the device will require them to retest. It will cost the offender $75 a month to lease the device. In Arizona a DUI is having a BAC over .08.

Should Sex Offenders’ Home Be Marked?
Today on KPRC News in Houston, Rev. Gilda Black proposed a bill that would identify registered sex offenders by having curbs painted in front of their homes. According to the DPS registry, Black’s neighborhood is home to 32 sex offenders. Some of her neighbors feel that it will bring the value of their property down and it will make sex offenders subject to violence.

Is it right for a repeated sex offender to receive life in prison? Yes, according to this report by KVUE News in Texas. James Ray Ross was sentenced to life on Wednesday for his second conviction for the sexual assault of a 15-year-old girl more than six years ago. Prosecutors say, “He was prosecuted under a special statute for repeat sex offenders that sets an automatic life in prison for the second conviction of sexual abuse of a child.

St. John Fisher college in Rochester, NY announced plans for the city's first law school.

A crime involves four people: the mastermind, an "insider" who exploits his position of trust with the target, and two accomplices. The first two have prior convictions; the latter two have little or no records and cooperate with the police. So, knowing nothing more than this, who would you expect to get the more severe sentences, and who would you expect to receive the lesser sentences?

Crime Stoppers: A program that works. Karen Bune, Victim Specialist Contributor from officer.com reports that Atlanta has finally found an innovative program that aids with solving crimes. From 2000 to 2002, Atlanta was ranked as the city with the highest rate of violent crime and the only city that did not have a Crime Stoppers program. Now within the first year, Atlanta’s Crime Stoppers has helped clear 64 cases. One example was solving the case of 9-year-old Annijah Rolax who was killed by a stray bullet last July while sitting at her computer.

Cyber crime costs big bucks. Martin Bosworth writes on consumeraffairs.com of a report issued on April 4 by the Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3), a partnership with the FBI’s Bureau of Justice Assistance and the National White Collar Crime Center. The report found that US citizens lost $239 million in various Internet based fraud schemes, which has risen from $189 million in 2006. The highest dollar loss per incident was reported by internet-based investment and retirement scams.

Missouri woman receives death penalty for the killing an expectant mother and keeping the child for her own. Lisa Montgomery strangled Bobbie Jo Stinnett and then cut the baby out of her abdomen. In Capital-Journal published Saturday, Steven Fry wrote that a federal judge sentenced Montgomery to death after an eleven-minute hearing. Neither the victim’s family or Lisa’s in laws had anything to say. Yet her defense attorney Fred Duchardt said “I'm sad that we were not able to convince the jury of what a sweet individual, a loving person, Lisa is.”

Discrimination Alleged Florida in Murder Case
Today ABC News reports, on an NAACP claim of discrimination in Manatee, Florida murder case. Michael Walker, a 19 year old, is connected with the death of 67-year-old Daniel Ramsey. Ramsey was shot on Valentine’s Day when he and his wife discovered two men robbing his home. Walker, who was the driver of the getaway car, is facing a 25 to life sentence if convicted. Local NAACP president Trevor Harvey says, “In similar cases white accomplices have received lighter sentences.”

Florida: Mental incompetence claims have doubled
According to the New-Press, a legislative study reports Florida has experienced a dramatic increase in felons found mentally incompetent to stand trial. Last year analysts estimated that 2,123 adults were judged incompetent for trial, more than twice the number judged incompetent in 2002. The Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability said, “This increase suggests that individuals with mental illness are coming into contact more frequently with the criminal justice system.”

On the 40th anniversary of the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr., Juan Williams has this op-ed in the Wall Street Journal on the state of Black leadership and Barack Obama. "While speaking to black people, King never condescended to offer Rev. Wright-style diatribes or conspiracy theories. He did not paint black people as victims." Can Obama do the same? "Last March in Selma, Ala., Mr. Obama appeared on the verge of breaking away from the merchants of black grievance and victimization. At a commemoration of the 1965 Selma-to-Montgomery march for voting rights, he spoke in a King-like voice."

But it wouldn't last.

From the very beginning -- in the pre-Internet dial-up BBS days -- online discussions have been infested with intellectual ankle-biters who have little or nothing of substance to add to the discussion and simply sling insults at those who do. This pollution of an otherwise valuable medium continues in the form of comments on blogs. A year and a half ago, SCOTUSblog tried an interesting experiment to clean up its comments by requiring commenters to use their real names. The experiment was a partial success, in my view, but not enough for the sponsors of the blog. A post there today states, in part:

At the beginning of OT06,* we instituted our current comment policy, whereby commenters will not be approved unless they leave their full names. We did that to prevent what we saw as unproductive sniping by a tiny minority of our readers that took away from the overall quality of the blog. After a year and a half of that policy, that sort of silly sniping has not abated despite the change.

As such, beginning immediately, we are going to formally disable the comments feature on most of our posts....

It is indeed unfortunate that it has come to this. I, for one, enjoy exchanging ideas with people who can remain civil while disagreeing. Regrettably, commenting on blogs too often involves opening oneself to ad hominem attacks and choosing between letting a public attack go unanswered or wasting time responding. The choices for a blog that has this problem are to (1) let it go uncorrected; (2) police the comments, an expenditure of time that few sponsors wish to make; or (3) turn off the comments, as SCOTUSblog has now done. If the sponsor chooses to let the problem go uncorrected, what typically happens is that thoughtful people stop or greatly reduce commenting, and the insult slingers come to dominate the comments. Choices (1) and (3) lead to the same result, then, that a useful medium is eliminated either de facto or de jure.

So the decline in civility of our society claims another victim. The SCOTUSblog experiment shows that uncivil behavior is reduced when people have to show themselves in public, but it is not eliminated. I suppose the result was to be expected, but it is sad nonetheless.

*October Term 2006, the term of the United States Supreme Court beginning on the first Monday in October.

Not much of interest in criminal law in the Supreme Court today. The Court decided an original jurisdiction case, New Jersey v. Delaware, involving a long-running dispute between those states regarding jurisdiction over the Delaware River. The only point of interest for us is that Justice Ginsburg wrote the opinion. See sudoku update, below.

In the orders list, the Court granted two civil First Amendment cases. No hot button criminal cases are in the denied list. Update: There is a criminal-related case that probably qualifies as "hot button." The Court turned down the Justice Department's certiorari petition regarding return of the materials seized in a search of Congressman William Jefferson's office. Robert Barnes reports here for the WaPo. DC Circuit opinion here. Cert. petition here. Curiously, the named party is not Congressman Jefferson but his office, Room 2113 in the Rayburn Building. I've heard of an office with prestige, but an office with standing is a new one to me.

Sudoku Update: The premise of SCOTUS sudoku is explained here. Since that previous post, we have had Medellin from the October sitting, written by Chief Justice Roberts, Hall Street from the November sitting, written by Justice Souter, and today's NJ v. Del from the December sitting, written by Justice Ginsburg. If the premise is correct, then United States v. Santos, the money laundering case, is being written by Justice Breyer or Justice Alito. Given the slowness of this opinion's emergence, I would bet on Breyer, who obviously spent a lot of time on his treatise dissent in Medellin. From November, United States v. Williams, the kiddie porn vagueness case, is being written by Justice Scalia or Justice Alito, probably not a good sign for the defendant. The biggie, Boumediene v. Bush, the Gitmo detainee case, is now down to Justice Kennedy or Justice Souter. Stay tuned.

Despite all the wailing and gnashing of teeth over the Supreme Court's decision in Medellin v. Texas, the holding is not all that remarkable. It has long been established that not all treaties are self-executing, and the Court held that the ones at issue here are not, based on their own language. Where adherence to a treaty is contrary to a statute, the President cannot override the statute unilaterally, but legislation is required. Far from making America a rogue nation, placement of the responsibility for treaty compliance in the political branches and not the judiciary is quite common in the world.

So the ball is squarely in Congress's court. The United States, of course, should live up to its treaty commitments. What would a congressional implementation of International Court of Justice's decision in Avena look like? It should go as far as our treaty obligations require and not a nanometer further.

The Supreme Court decided the case of Medellin v. Texas, 5-1-3. The case involves a decision of the International Court of Justice that the United States must reconsider the claims of about 50 Mexican nationals that their rights under the Vienna Convention were violated by the failure of police to inform them upon arrest that they could have the Mexican Consulate notified. In many of the cases, including Medellin, state courts had held that the claim was defaulted by failure to raise it in time. The ICJ held, in essence, that the default rule could not be applied at least to defaults occurring before the consulate had notice of the case. Two years ago, in Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon, the U.S. Supreme Court disagreed and held that the treaty does not trump state procedural default rules. However, that case did not involve any of the persons whose cases were actually before the ICJ.

Two arguments were made to distinguish the Medellin case from the earlier case. The first one was that the treaty obligations of the United States to submit Vienna Convention disputes to the ICJ and to comply with the ICJ decisions have direct legal force in domestic courts. The second was that a memorandum issued by the President to the effect that state courts would implement the ICJ decision was a proper exercise of the President's authority in foreign affairs.

Today's decision by Chief Justice Roberts rejected both arguments. The treaties are not self-executing, based on an analysis of their language. Although the United States has an obligation under international law, that obligation only becomes a domestic law binding on domestic courts if Congress enacts legislation to implement it. Second, although the President has broad powers in foreign affairs, he cannot transform a non-self-executing treaty into a self-executing one.

On page 25 of the slip opinion, the Court notes, "Congress is up to the task of implementing non-self-executing treaties, even those involving complex commercial disputes." We can expect the next stage of this drama to be the introduction of bills to implement the ICJ decision.

Elderly Killers: Victoria Kim from the L.A. Times reports on two elderly women, Helen Golay, 77 and Olga Rutterschimdt, 75, who are on trial for staging hit-and-runs to collect life insurance. The two victims, Kenneth McDavid and Paul Vados, were both homeless but were worth about $2.8 million in life insurance. The jury got to see the alleged murder weapon, a 1999 Mercury Sable station wagon, up close and personal. John Kolter, a CHP accident investigation specialist pointed out the side of the floor pan had been pushed which implies that the vehicle had ran over something.

Jail Sentence for YouTube video. Robert Echeverria will also receive three years of misdemeanor probation and is banned from the Rialto, CA Del Taco reports Steve Harvey from the L.A. Times. Echeverria’s clip shows him identifying himself as a CEO and claiming that he’d called Del Taco corporate offices. At the end of the video, the restaurant gives him and his two companions a new order. The police had no problem tracking him down: he gave his number out in the video. “It’s Taco Bell from now on,” says Echeverria.

Anti-gang group helps reach over 100,000 people in New York, Milwaukee, San Francisco and Vermont. AP writer, Ula Ilnytzky, reports that the history of the group started with Bob De Sena, who was once a gang member. His group, Council For Unity, aims at giving second chances to kids from broken homes and crime-ridden neighborhoods. One of those benefiting from the program is DaJuan Hawkins, 17, who once went to jail for assault is now heading for college and writing poetry.

Search and Seizure The Supreme Court will review the case of Pearson v. Callahan, 07-751 to decide whether police may enter a home without a search warrant when an informant is already inside and if the officers that conducted the search can be sued. More to come.

North Carolina new law on how to conduct lineups
A story by Nick Hiltunen in the Goldsboro News Argus reports that police officers must follow new procedures when conducting a lineup of suspects. The new law requires an ‘independent administrator’ with no ties to the case to conduct the lineup. Also, officers have to show one photo at a time, not in a group. In addition, law enforcement is working with a software company that will allow the witness to self-conduct the lineup by computer. Proponents say, “It’s an attempt to make eyewitness identification more scientific.” The problem is the cost of the software, which is $10,000.

New law bans sex offenders from social networks
On WISH TV News, the state of Indiana has passed a law that bans sex offenders from social networks that are popular with children like MySpace and Facebook. Reporter Jennifer McGilvray says, “Indiana is the first state to adopt this type of law.”

DNA database: According to Gary Pugh, who is soon to be the chief spokesperson for the Association of Chief Police Officers’ (ACPO), England does not collect enough DNA samples from the “right people” and could benefit from targeting samples from younger people to prevent future crimes. As reported in this story from The Press Association, the ACPO says that the statement is entirely Pugh’s opinion and they do not support his position. The Liberal Democrats condemned this idea of adding unsuspected young people to a DNA database. Police in England and Wales can take DNA from anyone arrested on a suspicion of a crime and keep their DNA on file for life.

New crack cocaine guidelines have caused many inmates to file for shorter sentences. A story in the Houston Chronicle and AP, reports that this action follows the new guidelines adopted last December by the U.S. Sentencing Commission to reduce the disparity between sentences for possession of crack cocaine vs. powder cocaine. The Assistant U.S. Attorney in Tyler, Texas said 80 inmates have already been released. He expects another 80 to be released within the next two weeks. Around the country, approximately 800 inmates have been released from the 20,000 who are eligible for a sentence reduction under the new guidelines.

High School dropout wins his own murder case: Washington Post reporter Ruben Castaneda writes that defendant Harold Stewart has received a not guilty verdict on charges of first-degree and second-degree murder. Steward, a high school dropout represented himself during the three day trial. Circuit Court Judge Vincent Femia, a judge for Prince George County, said, “It would make you wonder about the quality of the case, if a guy who knew nothing about the law could kick your [expletive]."

Victims' fund assists felons reports Josh Mitchell in the Baltimore Sun. "Nearly $1.8 million from the [Maryland Criminal Injuries Compensation Fund] has been awarded to drug dealers, violent offenders and other criminals since 2003, according to a Sun analysis of thousands of records obtained through the Maryland Public Information Act."

Guatemala death penalty vetoed: "Guatemalan President Alvaro Colom on Friday vetoed a bill that would have reinstated capital punishment and given the president the power to commute death penalty sentences," reports Juan Carlos Llorca for AP. "If (the death penalty) were a disincentive, we would reinstate it," Colom said. "But we have studied cases in various states in the United States, and it doesn't dissuade" crime. Evidently the President is unaware that the heavy preponderance of recent studies in the United States conclude that the death penalty does deter murder when actually enforced. The reinstatement passed the Congress by a majority sufficient to override the veto, so this story may not be over.

Love hurts. A Pennsylvania doctor was sentenced to life in prison for killing his best friend thirty years ago, so he could marry the friend's wife. Michael Rubinkam, from the AP staff writes that Dr. Stephen Scher was convicted in Susquehanna County for the first-degree murder of Martine Dillon. Initially, Scher lied about Dillon’s death saying that Dillon had tripped and accidentally shot himself while chasing a porcupine. Prosecutor Patrick Blessington says Scher has a God complex.

Missouri: New Assault Law
Southeast Missourian reporter Bridget DiCosmo writes that offender Cortez Bell, 30, is the first to be charged under Missouri’s new assault law. Before the law was passed an assault against a police officer was considered a misdemeanor; under the new law it is a felony. On Wednesday, Bell was sentenced to four years for assaulting a highway patrol officer. The sentence will run concurrently with the two four-year sentences for resisting arrest and possession of a controlled substance. Prosecutor Attorney Morley Swingle, says, “The law was passed to give officers on patrol additional protection.”

St. Louis: new law for child sex offenders
According to this AP story, St. Louis passed a law last week that will not allow sex offenders to start a business that caters to children. The city says that, “The law is aimed at businesses that specifically market to children.”

Wyoming: New self-defense law
Associated Press reports, that Gov. Dave Freudenthal signed the ‘castle doctrine’ bill into law yesterday, which will go into effect July 1st. The story says, “The term ‘castle doctrine’ refers to the notion that a person’s home is his castle, and he is entitled to defend it without retreating from criminal attack.” The new law will allow homeowners to kill intruders who enter their home illegally and not be sued. Supporters of this bill want to inform homeowners of their self-defense rights. Also, a National Rifle Association spokesman "said last month that 20 states had passed such laws."

Washington Strengthens ‘Three Strikes Law’
KATU news reported that the ‘The Chelsea Harrison Act’ (Senate Bill 6184) passed today. This law amends Washington’s ‘Three Strikes Law’ so that any felony conviction with a sexual motive commited in another state will be considered a strike. According to the story, Chelsea Harrison’s killer, Roy Russell, was convicted and sentenced to life in prison, but got out on appeal because one of his ‘strikes’ was committed in Arizona. Russell then murdered Miss Harrison.

New law for Illinois teen drivers
Daily Herald reporter Robert McCoppin writes that a new law bans 16- and 17-year-olds from driving after 10pm Sunday through Thursday, and after 11pm on Fridays and Saturdays. The law exempts new drivers who are driving home from work, school or religious activities. Experts say that the law will save lives among new drivers and predict a decrease in crash deaths among teenagers by 38 percent. As a result of this law, the story says, Illinois now has one of the toughest graduated driver’s license laws in the country. 16-year-old Ryan Domzalski complains about the new law, saying, “My social life has gone down the drain.”

2nd Amendment: An article by Nelson Lund from The Heritage Foundation discusses the Supreme Court case of DC v. Heller. Oral argument will be held on March 18.

Activities which are legal when freely given but criminal when purchased have been much in the news in last couple of days. Another of these is voting. In 2000, there was a scheme set up where people who really wanted to vote for Ralph Nader but lived in a state where it might matter could swap their votes with Gore voters in essentially uncontested states. Bill Jones, who was then California Secretary of State, threatened criminal prosecution. In August, a Ninth Circuit panel held that Jones had violated the First Amendment rights of the swappers and their broker. Today, the court denied rehearing en banc, Judges Kleinfeld, O'Scannlain, and Bea dissenting.

A study on Maryland death penalty costs released last week has serious flaws and paints a misleading picture. There are three major deficiencies apparent on the face of the Urban Institute’s report:

First, the study fails to consider the savings that result when a case is plea-bargained to life in prison, a bargain few murderers would agree to in the absence of the death penalty.

Second, the study intentionally ignores the savings that result from the deterrent effect of the death penalty, asserting without justification that one article criticizing the numerous deterrence studies is “conclusive.”

Third, the study assumes that the long delays and high reversal rates that have characterized Maryland’s death penalty in the past will continue indefinitely, ignoring the potential savings from reform of the review process.

It has been quite a while since crime and law enforcement were considered issues important enough to merit the attention of Presidential candidates. Even illegal drug use, which remains a serious national problem, has not been the subject of a question to candidates in the almost weekly debates during this political season. Terrorism, national security, the economy, immigration, health care, and education are the issues the candidates believe they must take positions on, but crime, other than how it relates to illegal immigration or terrorism, does not seem to be on anyone’s mind, other than the public’s.

Bill Stuntz over at Less Than the Least has an intriguing post about the relationship between culture, law, and punishment. He makes a number of good and interesting points about how culture shapes the law. He judiciously states:

A good deal of social science research suggests that people obey the law, when they do so, because the legal system seems fair and legitimate.

This is indeed true, but the implications are quite far-reaching and often at odds with the orthodoxy of what is considered the proper aim of crime, punishment, and responsibility.

The law in many respects is an emotional process. For all of the stoic statutes and dry regulations, how people relate to the law is governed mostly by their perceptions of justice and fairness. For the criminal code, legitimacy is strongest when the law is proportional to the behavior regulated. If we think about it, the common perception is that the criminal law is about regulating and punishing serious matters of the morally accepted code that we all share in common. Thus, the malice in se crimes such as murder and forcible rape are universally viewed as morally repugnant and deserving of the strongest punishments the law can dish out while crimes without malice suggest less punishment.

Last week the Pew Center on the States produced a report highlighting the statistic that the prison and jail population has topped 1% of the total population. The press release is here and the full report is here. In reaction, Investors Business Daily had this editorial noting that prison increases coincided with a dramatic drop in crime. Paul Cassell had this post at the Volokh Conspiracy with a similar graph making largely the same point.

The graph above shows the rate of violent crime (FBI violent index crimes per 100,000 population, in red on the left scale) and the number of prisoners in each year divided by the number of violent crimes in the same year (in blue on the right scale).

College Background Checks. Byron Ackerman uticaod.com reports that Herkimer County Community College officials are backing legislation that would allow peace officers to conduct background checks on students involved in a possible crime. The bill is also being supported by State University of New York. Recently, there have been assaults and stabbings on campus which has students concerned. HCCC President Ronald Williams believes the recent events could have been prevented if peace officers had the ability to conduct background checks. However, there are some concerns with violating a student’s privacy.

A First Amendment issue raised by a student against her school administrators is reported by the AP in today’s Washington Post. Avery Doninger claims that officials at Lewis S. Mills High School violated her free speech rights when they banned her from serving on the student council because of a blog journal entry written on her home computer. A federal lower court supported the school in Doninger’s punishment because the blog addressed school issues and other students could read it. The Supreme Court made a ruling that officials could bar vulgar and lewd speech if it undermined the school’s mission. However, the ruling was based on cases that involved events that happened at school or during a school activity.

Connecticut: Lawmakers want to ban locking up juveniles
Hartford Courant reporter Colin Poitras writes that U.S Rep. Chris Murphy is introducing the “Juvenile Justice Improvement Act” to Congress. If the act is passed, it would ban states from incarcerating juveniles who repeatedly run away and prevent juveniles that are charged with murder or rape from being locked up in adult jails . Instead, states would be required to put juveniles in programs that are known to work. Murphy says that since 1993, there has been an increase of 150 percent of teens that are incarcerated with adults. Also, Rep. Toni Walker, who supports juvenile justice reforms, said “Prosecuting youth in adult criminal courts increases the likelihood they will re-offend.”

Arizona allows guns on college campuses
According to this New York Times report by Randal Archibold, State Senator Karen Johnson sponsored a bill that passed with a 4 to 3 vote last week. The bill will allow people in colleges to carry a firearm if they have a concealed weapon permit. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, says, “15 other states are considering similar legislation for students and faculty to carry guns on campus.” Also, Jason Lewis, a student at University of Arizona, said, “It would at least let me protect myself and be a deterrent for criminals.”

Brain Scans: "Figuring out just what types of neuroscience are ready for the courtroom is one of the goals of a $10 million Law & Neuroscience Project funded by The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation," reports David Caruso for AP. Brain scans have become common in murder cases, with impressive looking pictures that may or may not have anything to do with human behavior. While we tend to be skeptical of any effort funded by this foundation, the study group appears to have some appropriately skeptical members, including Stephen Morse of U. Pa. "When people see pictures of the brain, they tend to fall prey to what I call 'the lure of mechanism.' They tend to think that we are all machines," he said.

Re-Entry Court is a program in Allen County, Indiana providing "[r]elease[] from prison early in exchange for electronic monitoring and a structured life," according to this story in the Fort Wayne Journal-Gazette by Ron Shawgo. We need to experiment with innovative programs, to be sure, but the experiments need to be evaluated with solid methodology and thoroughly checked data, so we can terminate the ones that don't work. "The newspaper’s analysis discovered several errors and omissions in the program’s data...." Evaluation of a program by people invested in it involves an obvious conflict of interest, and claims of savings and success in such evaluations should be regarded with caution.

Hackers interfering with criminal activity on the Internet
According to the Press Association, organized criminal gangs are having a problem with hackers interrupting illegal trade on the web. Sharon Lemon, deputy director of e-crime, says, “Criminals in a way, are policing the environment from the people who used to spread worms because they need the internet to be working.” These criminals are known to pay computer boffins to go through school to be a step ahead of their opponent. Next week in London, businesses, government officials, and police specialists from over 35 countries will come together and discuss what best ways work in stopping online crime.

Alabama: Felons struggling to regain Voting Rights
Inside the New York Times reporter Shaila Dewan writes that Rev. Kenneth Glasgow, founder of a ministry called The Ordinary People Society, helps people with past criminal backgrounds to vote again. According to the state attorney general, people are not allowed to vote if they commit a felony involving moral turpitude. The problem is that neither legislature nor the attorney general office has release a list defining what crimes are under moral turpitude. On a national standpoint, 5.3 million people do not have the right to vote because of criminal history. Ms. Reynolds, who was convicted of drug possession, received help from The Ordinary People Society, and said, “Voting, that’s a part of getting back to normal life.”

CRJ class proposed a bill on Eyewitness ID Procedures
According to the Eastern Kentucky University school newspaper, an advanced law class proposed a bill to help improve eyewitness identification procedures for law enforcement. Ashley Goff, a recent graduate from EKU who helped, said, “The House Bill 298 is to improve the chances of identifying the guilty, while reducing the risk of convicting the innocent by improving the accuracy of eyewitness identification in criminal cases.” If passed, it will be the first legislation of its kind in Kentucky.

Today, the Ninth Circuit designated for publication its order of February 14 on remand from the United States Supreme Court in Arave v. Hoffman.

Accordingly the U.S. Supreme Court vacated this court's judgment to the extent that it addressed the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel during plea bargaining, and remanded for future proceedings. We now instruct the district court to dismiss with prejudice Hoffman's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel during plea bargaining. The district court's grant of Hoffman's habeas petition on his claims of ineffective assistance of counsel with respect to sentencing still stands. The State of Idaho should proceed with the resentencing of Hoffman as ordered by the district court.

How nice. They "instruct" the district court to do substantially what it did correctly the first time before they mucked it up.

Anti-Spam Law Upheld By a narrow 4-3 vote, the Virginia Supreme Court has upheld the criminal conviction of Jeremy Jaynes for violating Virginia's anti-spam law, Larry O'Dell reports for AP. The court rejected Jaynes' arguments on jurisdiction, First Amendment, vagueness, and the Commerce Clause. The dissent accepted the First Amendment overbreadth argument.

Practicing criminal law can be hazardous to your mental health, reports Lynette Hoffman in the Australian. "New research from Macquarie University, to be published in the international journal Traumatology, has found that criminal law work can have profoundly damaging psychological effects."

Loaded firearms in U.S. Parks
Washington Post writer Christopher Lee reports that the U.S Department of Interior is considering easing restrictions on loaded firearms in national parks. The National Rifle Association supports the proposal and favors conforming park rules to state law. Park advocates and rangers’ organizations contend that the new rules would increase illegal hunting and more deadly domestic disputes. According to the article, there are 48 states that allow people to legally carry firearms for self-defense.

Report: Immigrants less likely to be incarcerated
Inside Bay Area reporter Javier Olvera writes that the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) reports that the foreign-born population only makes up 17% of state prison inmates, compared with 35% of the adult male population. The story notes "while the findings are surprising, they don't account for a complete relationship between immigration and crime." For example, it doesn’t included crimes like vandalism and shoplifting from immigrants, which results in jail time. Bill Cole, an advocate for laws that deport immigrants who commit crimes, disagrees with the findings. However, Salvador Bustamante agrees with the report because he says, “Immigrants come to the United States to work, often tying to stay under the radar of authorities and away from criminal activity to avoid deportation.”