On the federal Sentencing Guidelines grid, there are two axes. One is for the offense level, which started with a number pulled out of the collective butts of the Guidelines commission, then adds and occasionally subtracts numbers to reach the final number, whether it’s a drug conspiracy, insider trading or terrorism. The other axis is for criminal history.

See across the top? There are some curious details that go into what’s counted, and not counted, in criminal history, but for the most part, it’s fairly straightforward. More than ten years since the sentence was completed and it’s not included. Less and you get burned for it. Continue reading →

Before Greta Van Susteren became a talking head at Fox, part of Murdoch’s stable of conservative blonde women, she was a respected and knowledgeable criminal defense lawyer who did some great work at CNN, particularly during the OJ Trial.  Greta was the one thing that doesn’t exist today anywhere on the tube: someone who knew criminal law from the defense side and could explain it in a thoughtful and intelligent fashion.

A criminal defense lawyer, adjunct faculty member at Georgetown Law School, Greta was no dummy.  When she hosted Burden of Proof with Roger Cossack from 1994 to 2002, her intelligence and wit was on full display.

Somebody on air actually knew what they were talking about when it came to crim law. It wasn’t the usual horseshit talking head between commercials, being asked an idiot 4½ minute question that assumed the answer, and giving the 30 second reply that confirmed the host’s inflammatory narrative. Greta had depth. And then, poof, a new nose and she was gone.

When Greta Van Susteren was bought by Rupert Murdoch for Fox News, I defended her right to get a new nose, and felt this was an inappropriate basis for attack.  Many people get new noses for varying personal reasons, and Greta was every bit as entitled to a new nose as anyone else.

But what about a new brain?  Now that’s another story.

Continue reading →

Adam Liptak quotes Supreme Court Associate Sonia Sotomayor’s wry observation:

“The Supreme Court is never going to be a melting pot reflective of the country,” Justice Sotomayor said. “In most of our lifetimes, the court is only going to turn over one full circle.”

There are only nine potential seats, and despite some superficial signs of “diversity,” such as the black seat being held by Clarence Thomas, it hasn’t worked out the way identitarian-obsessed progressives seem to think it should. The numbers don’t allow for accommodation of the identity politics flavor of the day, particularly when that’s an ever-changing goalpost, and nine isn’t enough to accommodate the vast array of identity groups. Why is there no morbidly obese justice? Where is the blind justice? Who can hear the deaf justice? Certainly not the Slovenian justice, who speaks English as a second language.

Granted, it’s remarkably homogeneous by most metrics today:

Justice Kagan, speaking on Wednesday at the University of Arizona in Tucson, said the court may suffer from what she called a “coastal perspective,” The Arizona Daily Star reported. (She is from New York City. As is Justice Sotomayor. As is Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. As was Justice Scalia. Between the four of them, they represented every borough but Staten Island.)

Justice Scalia made a similar point in a dissent last year. “Eight of them grew up in East and West Coast states,” Justice Scalia wrote of the court’s membership at the time. “Only one hails from the vast expanse in-between,” he added, referring to Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., who is from Indiana.

Continue reading →

On the one hand, issuing a report that the sun rises in the east doesn’t seem worth the effort. On the other, it serves the purpose of reminding us that the problem is still there, and maybe deserves some room on the front burner. The report, issued by the Juvenile Law Center, is provocatively titled Debtors’ Prison For Kids, The High Cost of Fines and Fees in the Juvenile Justice System.

Across the country, youth and their families, including many in poverty, face monetary charges for a young person’s involvement in the juvenile justice system. Too often, the inability to pay pushes the young person deeper into the juvenile justice system and exacerbates the family’s economic distress. This report examines how and when youth and families face financial obligations, briefly looks at the economic consequences, and considers the legal consequences for failure to pay.

There is nothing in there that is unfamiliar to anyone representing the poor, in general, and poor kids, in particular. But these are the most easily forgotten, unless you happen to have the misfortune of being poor and involved in the legal system. In that case, it’s impossible to forget, as it follows you around forever. Continue reading →

On occasion, I’ve questioned the fact that journalists tend to be slightly less than accurate in reporting legal matters. It’s not that they’re bad people, necessarily, but that they just don’t know any better. Like most folks, they assume too much, apply their own sensibilities to things about which they know little to nothing, and then put it out there on their platform for all their readers to see. It’s not always pretty.

But ABC30 News’ Gene Haagenson doesn’t get the benefit of Hanlon’s Razor when he wrote his story about the 9th Circuit’s opinion that a medical marijuana user was precluded from purchasing a handgun.  He was told.

My first reaction when Gene Haagenson called me from ABC30 news to ask about a Nevada case preventing a woman with a medical marijuana card from owning—note that I’m stating it as the question was originally put to me, not as it really was considered in the court—a gun was that it was unconstitutional.

I told Gene I had not heard of the case yet, but would check as soon as I got the opportunity. I was driving at the time, so I couldn’t even look anything up on the computer.

Continue reading →

You would think this would be a big deal amongst the small crowd of passionate anti-revenge porn advocates, as it was a huge victory for a woman harmed. Isn’t that what it’s all about?

In what might be Michigan’s first revenge-pornography case resulting in a monetary judgment, a woman was awarded $500,000 this week after her ex-boyfriend posted nude photographs of her on multiple Internet sites.

Half a mil is a lot of money, but that’s not all. The woman’s lawyer, Kyle Bristow, did a great job taking down this miscreant.

According to court records from the Oakland County (Mich.) Circuit Court, Judge Martha Anderson awarded the sum Wednesday, which is set to accrue interest over time. Anderson also granted a permanent injunction against the ex-boyfriend, forcing him to immediately destroy and never republish the photos to third-party websites. If he does, Bristow said, he can be held in contempt and face prison or additional fines.

Continue reading →

While the issue at its most superficial level might appear to be about the validity of climate change, it’s not. Not even a little bit. Believe or disbelieve, it doesn’t matter.* The issue at hand could be anything. That it happens to be the validity of “human induced climate change” doesn’t matter.  That some profs at University of Colorado-Colorado Springs are throwing a course where they announce, in advance, that no student can question their premise, does.

Three instructors co-teaching an online course called “Medical Humanities in the Digital Age” recently told their students through an email that climate change is not up for debate and those who think it is should not enroll in the course, according to documents first obtained by The College Fix.

“The point of departure for this course is based on the scientific premise that human induced climate change is valid and occurring,” the email sent to students read. “We will not, at any time, debate the science of climate change, nor will the ‘other side’ of the climate change debate be taught or discussed in this course.”

In reaction to the University of Chicago letter to incoming students, that the school does not support safe spaces and trigger warnings, Jeet Heer cried “academic freedom!” What if profs wanted to give trigger warnings? What if they wanted to make their classrooms “safe spaces,” replete with puppies and Play-Doh? What about the academic freedom? Heer’s complaint was unpersuasive, as if a physics prof could teach deviant gender studies if that’s what she felt like teaching because to require her to teach, you know, physics, would impair her academic freedom. Continue reading →

The New York Court of Appeals did what it said it wouldn’t.

[W]e agree with Janice R. that any change in the meaning of “parent” under our law should come by way of legislative enactment rather than judicial revamping of precedent.

A wise sentiment, that lasted all of six years until Judge Sheila Abdus-Salaam wrote the opinion that undid the bright line rule of the 1991 decision in Matter of Alison D. v Virginia M., which held that a person who was neither the biological nor adoptive parent of a child had no standing to seek custody or visitation of a child.  And replaced it with a steaming pile of feelz.

In Matter of Brooke S.B. v. Elizabeth A. C.C., the Court gave in to social justice and gave away the protection of children. Continue reading →

The reason why cops are allowed to moonlight is simple: it’s a job perk going back to the days when police, like most public employees, were underpaid relative to those in the private sector, and allowed to make some extra money on the side. The same was true for 20 and out pensions, another gimme to compensate for lower current wages that kicked the cost down the road enough for current politicians to proclaim what a great job they were doing saving the taxpayers’ money. It was more palatable than paying them adequately in the first place, or paying them today rather than later.

But then, for many cops, most notably those in cities who enjoy strong unions, those days aren’t even a memory. Pay is comparable to, if not better, than what they could make in the private sector, and a full pension at 42 years of age is the perfect launching platform for the second half of their productive life. Yet, the perk remains.

It’s been a target here for years, Wearing the uniform we bought them, carrying the gun we bought them, and with the power of the badge we pinned on their very proud chest, cops get to sell themselves after hours to the highest bidder. Some get to drive their police cruiser to their rent-a-cop job. All get to be an authorized law enforcement officer for whomever slips them an envelope full of cash at the end of the shift.

Seth Stoughton, once a cop and now a prawf at the South Carolina law school, has decided to spill the beans on cop moonlighting. Continue reading →

One of the legacies of its Jesuit heritage is that Georgetown University kept excellent records of the slaves it sold in 1838 to keep the joint afloat. To its credit, it’s now trying to do something about it, as the climate in 2016 is to “reflect upon [Georgetown] University’s history and involvement in the institution of slavery.” Even the Jesuits had slaves back then.

Georgetown University is taking a series of historically important steps to atone for the acts of 19th-century Jesuits who held African-American men, women and children in slavery and sold 272 of them to Southern sugar plantations to keep the college that became Georgetown operating.

Regardless of whether anyone else believes that the historical atrocity of slavery should be left in the past, Georgetown, as a private institution, has chosen to deal with it today. The institution’s decision is laudable, and doesn’t require anyone else’s approval. If it makes you feel badly because it’s doing what others are not, or refuse to do, that’s your issue. Georgetown University makes its own decisions. And lives with them. Continue reading →