Months
after North Carolina Judge Gregory Weeks commuted three more sentences under
North Carolina’s Racial Justice Act; there is a buzz in Dallas, Texas for
advocating for similar legislation.
Craig Watkins, District Attorney for Dallas County, has voiced his
intentions of meeting with the state legislature to discuss the possibility of
passing a Racial Justice Act for Texas that would allow defendants to appeal
convictions or sentences where race is believed to be a factor. Watkins addressed the Associated Press,
“Throughout history, race has unfortunately played a part, an ugly part, in our
criminal justice system. This is an
opportunity for us to address not only the past, and those individuals who are
still being affected by the disparities in treatment, but also in looking
forward to make sure that we don’t have those same disparities in our criminal
justice system.”[1]
On
January 14, 2013, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in one such case: United
States v. Alleyne,[1]
a case about the role of juries in modern day sentencing. At issue in this case specifically is whether
the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt any fact that may be used
to increase a defendant’s sentence beyond a mandatory minimum. In criminal cases, even the most seemingly
insignificant issues are big issues.
These cases can determine whether someone goes to jail, and for how
long. As such, criminal issues are frequently
appealed up to the Supreme Court.
Minor non-violent offenses include but are not limited to: simple possession of alcohol, gambling, public
intoxication, disorderly conduct, petty theft and trespassing. Any of these indiscretions has the potential
of landing
someone in jail. In Florida where an
estimated $2.4 billion in the fiscal year of 2010-2011 in prisons, “non-violent offenders account for as
much as seven out of 10 prison admissions.”[1] Florida’s prison population has
more than doubled since 1990.
Oklahoma district judge
Mike Norman sentenced 17 year old Tyler Alred to ten years of church for DUI manslaughter.The teen had alcohol in his system when
he hit a tree and his 16 year old passenger was killed.Alred was not opposed to the sentence,
in fact, he already attends church regularly and agreed to the church attendance
mandate.The victim’s family also
agreed to the mandate.However,
the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is strongly opposed to the sentence believing
that the sentence violates the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise of
the First Amendment.
Just
days after President Obama was re-elected, the President accepted CIA Director
and retired Four-Star General David Petraeus’s
resignation. An FBI investigation had
uncovered that Petraeus was having an extramarital affair with his biographer
and Army reserve officer Paula
Broadwell. This extramarital affair
has not only been an embarrassment to the intelligence community (Broadwell was
found with classified documents and General John Allen has also been dragged
into the issue), but is a criminal offense for both participants.
On November 2, 2012, a U.S.
Air Force member stationed at Kadena Air Base in Okinawa, Japan, broke into a
family residence and assaulted a teenage boy.This occurred less than three weeks after the alleged rape
of an Okinawa woman by two U.S. sailors.After the alleged rape by the U.S. sailors on October 16, 2012, the U.S.
Armed Forces imposed an 11 PM to 5 AM curfew on all U.S. service members
stationed in Japan.The November 2 incident, however,
proved that the curfew was not an effective means to prevent crimes committed
by U.S. service members stationed at military bases in Japan.
Real or fake? Most consumers wouldn’t know the difference just by
looking at the pills. From September 25, 2012 to October 2, 2012, the Food and
Drug Administration (FDA) ordered the shutdown of over 4,000 websites selling
counterfeit drugs to unsuspecting consumers in the United States. The operation was a part of an internationally coordinated effort designed to stem
the sale of counterfeit medication worldwide. The Department of Health and Human Services estimates that about forty percent of Americans take at least one prescription medication. It is no secret that many Americans cannot afford their prescription medications.
Being cost conscious, some American consumers look to obtain medications from
sources abroad that offer lower prices than what are available domestically. However,
this seemingly economical decision does not come without great risk.
On November 1st,
2012, the Supreme Court heard arguments in the case Bailey v. United States, a
case challenging whether Michigan v. Summers allows police to detain someone
they observed leaving a premise that is about to be searched, who have driven
seven-tenths of a mile away.[1]
This challenge comes from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second
Circuit, which held that pursuant to Michigan v. Summers, Bailey’s detention
during the search of his residence was justified.[2]
In Michigan v. Summers, the Supreme Court held that it was lawful to require a
person leaving the front door of their home to re-enter and be detained in
their home until evidence establishing probable cause to arrest them was found.[3]
The question in Bailey is whether Summers is limited to suspicionless
detentions of a person in the immediate vicinity of the premises, or whether
Summers can be used to detain a person who has left the immediate vicinity.
Summers is an exception to the usual requirement that police have to have a
reasonable suspicion that a person was involved in criminal activity, or that
they are armed and dangerous, in order to detain them.
