Posts tagged ‘law’
by Edward Liu, Todd Garvey
Paperback, 11 pages, 2011, $10.00
A criminal prosecution involving CI may cause tension between the government’s interest in protecting CI and the criminal defendant’s right to a constitutionally valid trial. In some cases, a defendant may threaten to disclose CI in an effort to gain leverage. Concerns about this practice, referred to as “graymail,” led Congress to enact the Classified Info. Procedures Act (CIPA) to provide uniform procedures for prosecutions involving CI. Contents of this report: Background; The CIPA: Pretrial Conferences, Required Notice, and Appeals; Protective Orders and Security Clearances; Discovery: Brady and Jencks Material; Depositions; Admissibility of CI: Substitutions; Confrontation Clause and the Silent Witness Rule. A print on demand report.
Public Defender Offices, 2007: Statistical Tables
by Lynn Langton, Donald J. Farole jr.
Paperback, 17 pages, 2009, $15.00
Examines offices that provide representation for indigent defendants through a salaried staff of full-time or part-time attorneys employed as direct government employees or through a public, nonprofit organization. Public defender (PD) offices are categorized according to whether they are funded and admin. at the state government level, the county level, or through a combination of state and county government.
Topics include PD office staffing, caseloads, expenditures, and standards and guidelines used by the nearly 1,000 PD offices across 49 states and the D.C. In 2007, 964 PD offices across the nation received nearly 6 million indigent defense cases. Misdemeanor cases accounted for about 40% of all cases received by PD offices. Extensive charts and tables.
New Government Report: United States of America v. Paul A. Slough et al, Defendants: Ruling on the Case against Former Blackwater Security Guards
United States of America v. Paul A. Slough et al, Defendants: Ruling on the Case against Former Blackwater Security Guards
by Ricardo M. Urbina
Paperback, 90 pages, 2009, ISBN: 1437927750, $30.00
The sudden blow to the case against the former Blackwater security guards over a shooting that killed 17 Iraqis and wounded at least 20 may have come as a surprise to the public in Iraq and the United States, but the legal problem that the judge cited Thursday when he threw out the indictments was obvious to American government lawyers within days of the shooting, reports the New York Times.
This government report contains the ruling by Judge Ricardo M. Urbina of Federal District court in Washington, DC, on the case against former Blackwater security guards in Iraq over a shooting that killed 17 Iraqis and wounded at least 20.
Judge Ricardo threw out the indictments against the guards. In his opinion: “The defendants have been charged with voluntary manslaughter and firearms violations arising out of a shooting that occurred in Baghdad, Iraq on Sept. 16, 2007.
“They contend that in the course of this prosecution, the government violated their constitutional rights by utilizing statements they made to Deptartment of State investigators, which were compelled under a threat of job loss.
“The government has acknowledged that many of these statements qualify as compelled statements under Garrity v. New Jersey, 385 U.S. 493 (1967), which held that the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination bars the government from using statements compelled under a threat of job loss in a subsequent criminal prosecution.
“The Fifth Amendment automatically confers use and derivative use immunity on statements compelled under Garrity; this means that in seeking an indictment from a grand jury or a conviction at trial, the government is prohibited from using such compelled statements or any evidence obtained as a result of those statements.
“The government has also acknowledged that its investigators, prosecutors and key witnesses were exposed to (and, indeed, aggressively sought out) many of the statements given by the defendants to State Deptartment investigators.
“Under the binding precedent of the Supreme Court, the burden fell to the government to prove that it made no use whatsoever of these immunized statements or that any such use was harmless beyond any reasonable doubt.
“In short, the government has utterly failed to prove that it made no impermissible use of the defendants’ statements or that such use was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Accordingly, the court must dismiss the indictment against all of the defendants.”
New Government Report: Terrorist Attacks on Commercial Airlines: Federal Criminal Prohibitions (ISBN: 1437928471)
Terrorist Attacks on Commercial Airlines: Federal Criminal Prohibitions
By Charles Doyle (Paperback, 16 pages, 2010, $15)
In December 2009, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, a Nigerian man who allegedly ignited an incendiary device on a flight from Amsterdam to Detroit was charged with attempting to destroy the plane, according to NPR.
Federal authorities can prosecute terrorist attacks on commercial airlines under a wide variety of federal statutes. Some of those statutes outlaw crimes committed aboard a commercial airliner; some, crimes committed against the aircraft itself; others, crimes involving the use of firearms or explosives; still others, crimes committed for terrorist purposes. Although most apply when committed within the U.S., many apply to terrorist attacks overseas.
Contents of this report: Introduction; Crimes Aboard an Aircraft; Crimes Against an Aircraft; Crimes Involving Destructive Devices; Other Terrorist Crimes; Crimes Against Protected Individuals; Accomplice Liability; Selected Procedural Aspects; Pertinent Penalties and Territorial Jurisdictional Factors.
New Government Report: Medical Marijuana: Review and Analysis of Federal and State Policies (ISBN: 9781437932177)
Medical Marijuana: Review and Analysis of Federal and State Policies
By Mark Eddy (Paperback, 47 pages, 2010, $25)
U.S. Representative Barney Frank is among 15 members of Congress pushing the Treasury Department to set rules that would help banks provide financial services to medical marijuana dispensaries, according to Bloomberg News’ Businessweek.
Contents: (1) Intro.; (2) Medical Marijuana (MM) Prior to 1937; (3) Federal MM Policy: Congress. Actions: Marijhuana Tax Act of 1937; Controlled Substances Act; Hinchey-Rohrabacher Amend.; Exec. Branch Actions and Policies: Approval of Marinol; Admin. Law Judge (ALJ) Ruling to Reschedule MM; NIH Workshop; Inst. of Med. Report; Denial of Petition to Reschedule Marijuana; FDA Statement That Smoked Marijuana is Not Med.; ALJ Ruling to Grow Research Marijuana; DEA Enforce. Actions Against MM Providers; Obama Admin. and MM; MM in the Courts: U.S. v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers’ Coop.; Conant v. Walters; Gonzales v. Raich; Amer. for Safe Access Lawsuit; (4) State and Local MM Laws; (5) Public Opinion; (6) Arguments For and Against MM.