<< Executions Tomorrow | Main | Civilian Trials Vindicate Our True Values, Etc. - Part II >>

News Scan

The AP on Pinholster:  The AP has this article on the Pinholster decision issued today.  See Kent's post here.

Court to Review Jail Strip Searches:  The Supreme Court today agreed to review a Third Circuit opinion upholding routine strip searches of arrestees upon their arrival in jail, reports the AP.  Albert Florence sued a New Jersey county jail after officials conducted a strip and visual body-cavity search, alleging a violation of his Fourth Amendment rights.  The Third Circuit, while "not minimiz[ing] the extreme intrusion on privacy" that accompanies a strip search, upheld the practice in light of a detention facility's security and safety interests.  The case is Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Burlington, case no. 10-945.

Texas Board Denies Clemency for Death Row Inmate:
  The Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles denied clemency today for death row inmate Cleve Foster, 47, who is scheduled for execution tomorrow for the murder of a Sudanese woman at a Fort Worth bar nine years ago.  Foster's attorneys had argued officials didn't follow administrative procedures properly when they announced the substitute of pentobarbital for sodium thiopental last month, a claim rejected by a state trial court last week.  Michael Graczyk of the AP has this story.

Medical Marijuana & Guns:  Jeff Barnard of the AP reports on the clash unfolding in Oregon between medical marijuana rights and the Second Amendment.  A few sheriffs in Oregon have denied gun permits to people with medical marijuana cards, claiming support in federal gun control legislation.  A group of card carriers have fought back, arguing state gun law trumps federal law in this situation.  The case is now pending in the Oregon Supreme Court.

Burglarizing Your Own Home:  Your partial ownership of property doesn't mean you can't burgle it, the Supreme Court of South Carolina held today.  Ferris Singley was sentenced to life in prison after he was convicted of breaking into his childhood home, tying his mother to a bed, and demanding money.  On appeal, Singley claimed he had a 12.5 percent interest in the home and could not be validly convicted of breaking into his "own home."  The court rejected his argument.  "[T]he proper test is whether, under the totality of the circumstances, a burglary defendant had custody and control of, and the right and expectation to be safe and secure in, the dwelling burglarized."  Because Singley had been kicked out of his childhood home "with little protest," found another place to live, and reentered the house six months later through a back window, a jury could have reasonably concluded Singley did not have a lawful possessory interest in the home.  Meg Kinnard of the AP has this story.

Leave a comment

Monthly Archives