Libraries are bridges to information and knowledge.

Robert C. Richard, Editor in Chief of Vox PopoLII reports thatSarah Rhodes has just published a terrific new overview of digital legal preservation, entitled “Preserving Born-Digital Legal Materials…Where to Start?” on Cornell’s VoxPopuLII blog. The post addresses core concerns, as well as emerging issues, and provides a thorough and accessible view of the field. He thinks it will prove a very rewarding resource for novices and experienced preservation professionals alike.

The third annual IP Business Congress (IPBC) is taking place at the Bayerischer Hof Hotel, Munich’s premium five-star hotel, between 20th and 22nd June 2010.

The super early-bird discount price for the IPBC expires this Friday 22nd January. If you register by the end of Friday, the registration fee is reduced from €1,500 to just €995, risk free. To take advantage of this offer please click here.

With close to 200 senior-level attendees already confirmed, the event is once again proving incredibly popular and is well on its way to reaching capacity. With a host of cutting-edge thought-leaders already confirmed as speakers and sponsorship from Thomson Reuters, Philips and General Electric, among many others, the IPBC is shaping up to be the networking opportunity for the movers and shakers in the IP world in 2010.

Includes both useful resources and a request for information from the courts.

Nora Sydow reports that the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) has recently developed a Social Media and the Courts web module. Included in this module is a state links page that links to courts that are using Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, etc. In an effort to make this page as complete as possible, we are asking for your help.

(1) If your court is using a social media site, could you please send me the link(s) so we can include them in our state links page?

January – February 2010 Issue:

The January/February 2010 issue of D-Lib Magazine (http://www.dlib.org/) is now available.

This issue contains eight articles, two conference reports, the ‘In Brief’ column, excerpts from recent press releases, and news of upcoming conferences and other items of interest in ‘Clips and Pointers’. This month, D-Lib features The Swingle Plant Anatomy Reference Collection, a historical collection of plant anatomical microscope slides, courtesy of University of Miami Libraries.

By Jan M. Spaeth Ph.D.

“These DVDs provide real assistance to counsel in guiding witnesses through what can be a scary prospect. Not preachy or intimidating, these videos set just the right tone in providing guidance while inspiring confidence. After watching one of these programs, a witness should be much better prepared.”

–Philip R. Higdon, Esq., Perkins, Coie, Brown & Bain, P.A.

Posted on behalf of the Court History and Public Education division of the Indiana Supreme Court. Please contact Ms. Sarah Hachey with your requests.

The Indiana Supreme Court is pleased to announce the addition of two new

FREE* publications to the Indiana Supreme Court Legal History Series.

A Service from the ABA Criminal Justice Section, http://www.abanet.org/crimjust

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled against a defendant convicted of the rape of a 9-year-old girl after a night of heavy drinking.

The Supreme Court said in a per curiam opinion that overstated estimates of a DNA match at trial did not warrant reversal of a conviction when there is still “convincing evidence of guilt.”

To view the full-text of cases you must sign in to FindLaw.com. All summaries are produced by Findlaw

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, EVIDENCE, HABEAS CORPUS, PER CURIAM McDaniel v. Brown, No. 08-559 In habeas proceedings arising from a rape conviction, a circuit court of appeals’ order affirming the grant of petitioner’s habeas petition is reversed and remanded where: 1) the court of appeals’ analysis failed to preserve the factfinder’s role as weigher of the evidence by reviewing all of the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, and it erred in finding a state court’s resolution of petitioner’s claim to be objectively unreasonable; and 2) petitioner forfeited his claim that a prosecution expert incorrectly described the statistical implications of certain DNA evidence.

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, HABEAS CORPUS, SENTENCING Smith v. Spisak, No. 08–724 In capital habeas proceedings, a grant of petitioner’s habeas petition is reversed where a state court’s rejection of claimed errors regarding jury instructions and verdict forms, as well as ineffective assistance of counsel, was not contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law as: 1) the jury instructions and forms in the penalty phase made clear that, to recommend a death sentence, the jury had to find unanimously that each of the aggravating factors outweighed any mitigating circumstances, but they did not say that the jury had to determine the existence of each individual mitigating factor unanimously; and 2) even assuming that defense counsel’s closing argument was inadequate in the respects claimed by petitioner, there was no reasonable probability that a better closing argument without such defects would have made a significant difference.

Contact Information