In Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders, the 4th Amendment propriety of 2 strip searches of Albert Florence, a New Jersey resident is being reviewed by SCOTUS. Florence, after a traffic stop, was arrested on a bench warrant for failure to pay a fine even through Florence produced a receipt showing payment of the fine.
.
At intake, Florence was told to strip, open his mouth, lift his tongue and his genitals and to shower. He remained in jail for six days until being transferred to the Essex County jail where he underwent a more extensive strip search that included being ordered to squat and cough and then to shower. One day later, he was released when the charge was dismissed.
.
Florence sued both counties and various officials, charging that their strip search procedures violated the 4th Amendment protection against unreasonable searches. After a federal district court granted summary judgment in favor of Florence, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3d Circuit reversed saying prison officials should be accorded "wide-ranging deference" in enforcing policies necessary to maintain security and order in their prisons.
.
During arguments, the justices peppered Goldstein, representing Florence, with questions about where and when reasonable suspicion is required and seemed at times confused and dissatisfied with his answers. "What is the greater intrusion — standing two or five feet away" from the naked arrestee when inspecting him or her, asked Justice Sonia Sotomayor. "That is a line that doesn't make much sense to me."
.
Goldstein explained that a prison officer might conduct a visual inspection from a distance of 10 feet. In that scenario, a naked arrestee showering and applying medication for lice does not require reasonable suspicion. His only concern, said Goldstein, is "the very close inspection of the individual's genitals, which can occur absolutely so long as there is some minimal level of suspicion that's created."
.
Phillips argued totold the justices that no reasonable suspicion is required even for intrusive body cavity searches. "That's the rule of law," he insisted, adding also that it did not matter whether the arrestee was being admitted into the general prison population because the risks "remain too substantial."
.
"Suppose someone is just arrested because they have a lot of tickets for being caught on speed cameras, let's say," suggested Justice Samuel Alito Jr. "That person can be subjected to the searches that you are describing?"
Phillips replied, "Yes, Justice Alito. I think the basic principle we are asking for is that deference to the jails and — and to the administrators of the jails. (It) requires that this Court respect their judgment that you can't make a distinction based on that specific individual; that whether somebody is a minor offender or a major offender: One, is never all that clear in the first place; and two, isn't a basis on which to distinguish the risks that it poses."
Justice Stephen Breyer was particularly skeptical that minor offenders posed a contraband problem based on some studies, and Justice Anthony Kennedy called the evidence "skimpy."
.
Saharsky said the question before the Court is whether there are reasons for a blanket rule — strip searches of all arrestees — to which the Court should defer. "First of all, you cannot say that there are some minor offenders that don't pose a contraband risk," she argued. "They are documented in the record. Second, you have individuals who are making very quick determinations. They have large numbers of people to get through into the general prison population. They have very little time, and if they guess wrong, those mistakes can be deadly."
.
If the rule is so important, why isn't it federal policy, asked Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Saharsky conceded that federal arrestees are given a choice of being strip searched and placed in the general prison population, or not being strip searched and placed in an alternative cell. "Who consents to that?" wondered Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. Saharsky said computers and other privileges are available to the general population.
.
In an unusual comment directed at the Office of Solicitor General, Justice Ginsburg called the government's brief in the case "really confusing." Saharsky apologized.
.
Blogger Bob's comment: It is an interesting case that shows a thought process maybe consistent with the notion the 4th amendment is not DOA in these times.
Monday, October 31, 2011
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
DISTRICT ATTORNEY MIKE RAMOS WANTS MORE MONEY, EVEN IF IT SHUTS DOWN MORE COURTS?
In a whirlwind PR tour focusing not on conviction rates for major crimes but years of total sentences meted out, Mike Ramos admits he is actively lobbying the Governor's office (ya know the Democratic candidate who attended Ramos' fundraiser when there was a democratic challenger) for more permanent funding for the monitoring of the early releasees from state prison (caused by various court orders); the sad part of all this is that the Courts which Ramos' staff fills with cases, is operating on reserves--they ran out of budgeted money some time back!! Mike Ramos' lobbying (for permanent funding of the handling of the early, court-mandated state prison releasees) could drain court funding, forcing more courtroom closures and or staff reductions. Ramos remark? "They should have people present in funding discussions" (like they would know when Ramos is calling the Governor's staff). The empire building of Mike Ramos, even if it cripples the Court system which exists for everyone, is something that has to be watched. Maybe its time to look at prosecution decisions? If 90% of the alleged domestic violence victims want the charges against the significant other dropped as was recently reported in the local papers, is that part of the culture of abuse and victim response, or maybe could some of it be cases that could be deferred to civil harassment and restraining order (and injunction) remedies [See California Code of Civil Procedure Section 527.6, 527.8 & Welfare & Institutions Code Sec 15657.03], for which there is a ready remedy, can be handled using Judicial Council forms [CH-100 & a fee waiver] and court trained staff to already handle [and if there are violations of the injunctions, automatic incarceration].
WHY BRAD MITZELFELT HAS NO BUSINESS BEING A SUPERVISOR FOR the 1st DISTRICT of SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY
"On October 12th, 2011, 16-year-old Armando Ramirez was cleaning out a tunnel at Community Recycling and Resource Recovery, Inc., a large scale waste facility in Lamont, California when he collapsed, suddenly overcome by hydrogen sulfide. Hydrogen sulfide is a toxic gas that attacks the central nervous system and is produced when facilities improperly compost organic waste. Armando's 22-year-old brother, Eladio attempted to rescue Armando but was overcome by the fumes himself.
Armando died before he reached the hospital. Eladio was pronounced brain-dead and died two days later after being removed from life support. Family members reported that the brothers were not provided with any safety protection other than a flimsy painter's mask and rubber boots.
Since opening in 1993, Community Resource and Recycling has repeatedly been fined and cited for violating local and state regulations. Local residents and state politicians are now asking the County to close the facility.
Please join us in protecting this community and sign the petition on Change.org
http://www.change.org/petitions/kern-..."
Blogger Bob's comments: You say so what? Well, this very type of facility was approved by the County of San Bernardino for construction in the High Desert, by a company with a history of complaints in its Adelanto operation (which was shut down). The project would be illegal if it were built in the South Coast Air Quality Management District, which four of the other County Supervisorial Districts are principally covered by, so what does Brad the Toad do, he finds a place in the High Desert for one of his and his former boss' (Postmus) contributors.
Armando died before he reached the hospital. Eladio was pronounced brain-dead and died two days later after being removed from life support. Family members reported that the brothers were not provided with any safety protection other than a flimsy painter's mask and rubber boots.
Since opening in 1993, Community Resource and Recycling has repeatedly been fined and cited for violating local and state regulations. Local residents and state politicians are now asking the County to close the facility.
Please join us in protecting this community and sign the petition on Change.org
http://www.change.org/petitions/kern-..."
Blogger Bob's comments: You say so what? Well, this very type of facility was approved by the County of San Bernardino for construction in the High Desert, by a company with a history of complaints in its Adelanto operation (which was shut down). The project would be illegal if it were built in the South Coast Air Quality Management District, which four of the other County Supervisorial Districts are principally covered by, so what does Brad the Toad do, he finds a place in the High Desert for one of his and his former boss' (Postmus) contributors.
Monday, October 17, 2011
Dead Horses
The Dead Horse Theory
The tribal wisdom of the Dakota Indians, passed on from generation-to-generation, says that when you discover that you are riding a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount.
However, in government, education, and in corporate America, more advanced strategies are often employed, such as:
1. Buying a stronger whip.
2. Changing riders.
3. Appointing a committee to study the horse.
4. Arranging to visit other countries to see how other cultures ride dead horses.
5. Lowering the standards so that dead horses can be included.
6. Reclassifying the dead horse as living-impaired.
7. Hiring outside contractors to ride the dead horse.
8. Harnessing several dead horses together to increase speed.
9. Providing additional funding and/or training to increase the dead horse's performance.
10. Doing a productivity study to see if lighter riders would improve the dead horse's performance.
11. Declaring that as the dead horse does not have to be fed, it is less costly, carries lower overhead and therefore contributes substantially more to the bottom line of the economy than do some other horses.
12. Rewriting the expected performance requirements for all horses.
And, of course, when all else fails . . .
13. Promoting the dead horse to a supervisory position.
Blogger Bob's comment: God's reward for the Dakota's sense of humor, was to reward them with minable gold and one of the richest new oil fields in the Free World. God's gift to the American government, leaking oil wells in the Gulf, acid rain from the coal burning plants, nuke designs proned to failure and wind and solar projects put on the back burner for the past 4 decades due to the pressure of stock and pension portfolios that profit from hyerinflated oil stocks.
The tribal wisdom of the Dakota Indians, passed on from generation-to-generation, says that when you discover that you are riding a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount.
However, in government, education, and in corporate America, more advanced strategies are often employed, such as:
1. Buying a stronger whip.
2. Changing riders.
3. Appointing a committee to study the horse.
4. Arranging to visit other countries to see how other cultures ride dead horses.
5. Lowering the standards so that dead horses can be included.
6. Reclassifying the dead horse as living-impaired.
7. Hiring outside contractors to ride the dead horse.
8. Harnessing several dead horses together to increase speed.
9. Providing additional funding and/or training to increase the dead horse's performance.
10. Doing a productivity study to see if lighter riders would improve the dead horse's performance.
11. Declaring that as the dead horse does not have to be fed, it is less costly, carries lower overhead and therefore contributes substantially more to the bottom line of the economy than do some other horses.
12. Rewriting the expected performance requirements for all horses.
And, of course, when all else fails . . .
13. Promoting the dead horse to a supervisory position.
Blogger Bob's comment: God's reward for the Dakota's sense of humor, was to reward them with minable gold and one of the richest new oil fields in the Free World. God's gift to the American government, leaking oil wells in the Gulf, acid rain from the coal burning plants, nuke designs proned to failure and wind and solar projects put on the back burner for the past 4 decades due to the pressure of stock and pension portfolios that profit from hyerinflated oil stocks.
Panhandling & Begging One of Those Constitutional Rights? Yup !
The First Amendment protects begging or panhandling when it is conducted peacefully. See United States v. Kokinda, 497 U.S. 720, 725, 110 S.Ct. 3115, 111 L.Ed.2d 571 (1990) (plurality opinion); Riley v. Nat'l Fed'n of the Blind of N.C., Inc., 487 U.S. 781, 796, 108 S.Ct. 2667, 101 L.Ed.2d 669 (1988); Vill. of Schaumburg v. Citizens for a Better Env't, 444 U.S. 620, 632, 100 S.Ct. 826, 63 L.Ed.2d 73 (1980) (“charitable appeals for funds” are protected speech); Smith v. City of Fort Lauderdale, Fla., 177 F.3d 954, 956 (11th Cir.1999); Loper v. N.Y.C. Police Dep't, 999 F.2d 699, 704 (2d Cir.1993) (“We see little difference between those who solicit for organized charities and those who solicit for themselves in regard to the message conveyed. The former are communicating the needs of others while the latter are communicating their personal needs.”); Benefit v. City of Cambridge, 424 Mass. 918, 679 N.E.2d 184, 187–88 (Mass.1997): State v. Boehler, __ Ariz. ___, ___ P.3d ___ , 2011 WL 4047350, fn. 4 (App. 2011).
State Soverignty Used to Stop Fed's Extradition Request! If Upheld, is DEA's New Prosecution Threats of Medical Marijuana Collectives in Trouble?
Rhode Island refused to turn over murder deft to feds on ground that he would then face the death penalty. 1st Circuit upholds refusal! [USAG's petition for rehearing en banc is due on 11/23]. Article covering subject:
.
http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/appeals_court_blocks_transfer_of_ri_defendant_to_federal_authorities/
.
Blogger Bob's comments: Some legal commentators have suggested that maybe having to stay for the rest of your life on Rhode Island is enough of a punishment! Putting all that as an aside, if the 1st Circuit's decision gets upheld, this might breathe new life into the medical marijuana movement in California and give a way to beat back AG Holder's renewed threat to prosecute medical marijuana growers and distributors?
.
http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/appeals_court_blocks_transfer_of_ri_defendant_to_federal_authorities/
.
Blogger Bob's comments: Some legal commentators have suggested that maybe having to stay for the rest of your life on Rhode Island is enough of a punishment! Putting all that as an aside, if the 1st Circuit's decision gets upheld, this might breathe new life into the medical marijuana movement in California and give a way to beat back AG Holder's renewed threat to prosecute medical marijuana growers and distributors?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)