Libraries are bridges to information and knowledge.

Projected publication dates from July 2009 to September 2010*

Sorted in ascending order by projected publication date:

Title: Criminal Law and Procedure for the Paralegal
Author: Gary W. Carter
Publication Date: July 2009
Publisher: Wolters Kluwer Law & Business
Market: United States
ISBN: 0-7355-7012-4
ISBN 13: 978-0-7355-7012-2
Binding Format: Trade Paper
Price: $95.95(USD) Retail (Publisher)
—————————————

Title: International Children’s Rights
Author: Sara Dillon
Publication Date: November 2009
Publisher: Carolina Academic Press
Market: United States
ISBN: 1-59460-115-1
ISBN 13: 978-1-59460-115-6
Binding Format: Trade Cloth
Price: $100.00(USD) Retail (Publisher)
—————————————

Title: The Criminal Cases Review Commission: Hope for the Innocent?
Contributor: Michael Naughton (Editor)
Publication Date: December 2009
Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan
Market: United States
ISBN: 0-230-21938-1
ISBN 13: 978-0-230-21938-0
Binding Format: Trade Cloth
Price: $90.00(USD) Retail (Macmillan)
—————————————

Title: Real Law Stories: Inside the American Judicial Process
Author: Richard A. Brisbin John C. Kilwein
Publication Date: December 2009
Publisher: Oxford University Press, Incorporated
Market: United States
ISBN: 0-19-973359-7
ISBN 13: 978-0-19-973359-0
Binding Format: Trade Paper
Price: $22.95(USD) Retail (Publisher)
Continue reading

CLLB Abstract Prepared by Michael Chernicoff

http://blogs.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2009/11/fmri-evidence-u.html

The defense lawyer for Brian Dugan, an Illinois man convicted of raping and killing a 10-year-old girl, used fMRI brain scans as evidence during the sentencing phase of his trial show that their client should be spared the death penalty because he has a brain disorder. The defense argued that Dugan was born with a mental illness – psychopathy. This, said the defense, should be a mitigating factor since it impaired his ability to control his behavior.

CLLB Abstract prepared by Michael Chernicoff

Does Bringing a Terrorist Suspect From Gitmo to New York Confer Any More Legal Rights?

http://volokh.com/2009/11/20/does-bringing-a-terrorist-suspect-from-gitmo-to-new-york-confer-any-more-legal-rights/

With funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to the National Center for State Courts, the Center-hosted Self-Represented Litigation Network, in cooperation with the Legal Services Corporation, is presenting:

A Training on Public Libraries and Access to Justice January 11-12, 2010, Austin, Texas

Information on Application Process

I am grateful to Lesley Ellen Harris for granting me permission to publish the complete issues of her New Media Law & E-Commerce News on this blawg as they appear. Here is Leslie’s most recent issue.:

FROM THE OFFICES OF LESLEY ELLEN HARRIS Copyright, New Media Law & E-Commerce News __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________

Vol. 13, No. 5, December 1, 2009

Since the beginning of the last century when physicists determined that light could be considered as consisting of particles (photons) as well as waves, there have been efforts, with varying degrees of success, to use light to further the development of technology and communications. One of the latest attempts as reported by Judge Herbert Dixon Jr. in a recent e-mail involves fascinating research by Intel to develop a new optical interconnect using Light Peak optical technology to link mobile devices to displays and storage up to 100 meters away. The technology uses light to provide communication between data systems and devices associated with PCs at speeds up to 10 gigabits per second..

Judge Dixon reports that: Current cable technology uses electricity to transfer data which limits the speed and length of the transmission. Using Light Peak as the platform (containing a controller chip and an optical module), electricity is converted to light, increasing transmission length. Light Peak also retains the quality of high-definition video displays from transmissions over several meters. It can transfer full length Blu-Ray movies in less than 30 seconds, and runs multiple protocols simultaneously over a single cable..

Click here for added discussion about this technology.

November 23-27, 2009.

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

——————————————————————————–

U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, November 25, 2009 US v. Gonzalez-Velez, No. 07-2277 Defendant’s sentence of 135-months’ imprisonment after being convicted of participating in a conspiracy to distribute narcotics is affirmed where: 1) trial court’s reliance on witness’ testimony was not unreasonable; 2) district court did not err in attributing the full five kilograms of cocaine to defendant in calculating the base offense level of 32; 3) district court did not err in denying defendant’s request for a two-level reduction in his offense level for acceptance of responsibility.

U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, November 25, 2009 Michtavi v. N.Y. Daily News, No. 08-2111 In an action for libel and intentional infliction of emotional distress based on news reports stating that plaintiff, a criminal defendant, was to cooperate with prosecutors, dismissal of the complaint is affirmed where the statement reporting that plaintiff planned to cooperate with authorities was not defamatory as a matter of law.

U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, November 24, 2009 US v. Phillips, No. 07-4230 Defendant’s conviction for securities fraud, mail fraud, and other related crimes is affirmed as a warrant’s inclusive language was reasonably read by the postal inspection agents to encompass the seized evidence and thus, the agents’ seizures were permissible.

U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, November 25, 2009 US v. Carey, No. 08-60961 Defendant’s aggravated sexual abuse of a minor conviction and sentence are affirmed where: 1) the admissibility of testimony accompanied by a Fed. R. Evid. 612 refreshment did not depend upon the source of the writing, the identity of the writing’s author, or the truth of the writing’s contents; 2) a victim-witness’s youth and nervousness could satisfy Rule 611’s necessity requirement; and 3) defendant’s sentence was not procedurally unreasonable because the district court examined the 18 U.S.C. section 3553 factors.

U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, November 23, 2009 US v. Simmons, No. 07-3449 Defendant’s sentence of 116 months’ imprisonment for possession of more than five grams of crack cocaine with intent to distribute and for being a previously convicted felon in possession of a firearm is affirmed and remanded where, although the district court’s sentencing was procedurally and substantively adequate, the Guidelines have since been revised to lower the range for certain crack offenses and defendant may be eligible for a sentencing reduction.

U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, November 23, 2009 US v. Petrus, No. 08-1706 Defendant’s sentence to 70 months’ imprisonment for conspiring to possess with intent to distribute illegal drugs is affirmed where: 1) the district court did not commit any significant procedural error in imposing defendant’s sentence and the sentence was procedurally reasonable; and 2) considering the totality of the circumstances, including the Guidelines, the section 3553(a) factors, the nature of the offense, defendant’s family situation, his immigration status, his lack of criminal history, and defendant’s asserted attempt to cooperate with the government, the 70 month sentence is substantively reasonable.
Continue reading

November 23-27, 2009.

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

U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, November 23, 2009 Vaqueria Tres Monjitas, Inc. v. Irizarry, No. 07-2240 In plaintiffs’ suit against Puerto Rico’s Milk Industry Regulation Administration, claiming that the Administration’s regulatory scheme governing milk prices violates the Due Process, Equal Protection, Takings, and dormant Commerce Clauses, grant of a preliminary injunction enjoining the regulatory scheme is affirmed where: 1) the district court properly declined defendants’ invitation to abstain from entertaining the action; 2) the Eleventh Amendment does not bar the form of relief granted by the district court in its preliminary injunction; 3) the district court did not abuse its discretion in rejecting defendants’ unclean hands defense; 4) the district court did not abuse its discretion in failing to dismiss the action on the basis of laches; 5) the district court did not abuse its discretion in rejecting defendants’ estoppel defense; and 6) district court did not abuse its discretion in granting plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction. ..

U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals, November 24, 2009 Stratechuk v. Bd. of Educ., S. Orange-Maplewood Sch. Dist. , No. 08-3826 In plaintiff’s 42 U.S.C. section 1983 suit challenging school district’s prohibition on celebratory religious music at school-sponsored events for the purpose of maintaining a policy of complete religious neutrality, summary judgment for the school district is affirmed as the court did not err in concluding that December concerts are not public fora, and that the school district’s interpretation of the policy was reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical concerns.

U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, November 25, 2009 Entm’t Prod., Inc. v. Shelby County, Tenn. , No. 08-5494 Denial of plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction in their suit against the county challenging the constitutionality of the Tennessee Adult-Oriented Establishment Registration Act is affirmed where: 1) the district court did not err in denying the preliminary injunction on the basis that plaintiffs did not demonstrate a substantial likelihood of success in their challenges to the definitions of “adult cabaret,” “adult-oriented establishment,” and “adult entertainment”; 2) the district court did not err in holding that a vagueness challenge is not likely to succeed on the merits as a narrowing construction sufficiently clarifies the parts this Act allegedly contaminated by vagueness; 3) plaintiffs’ claim that the Act’s requirements will result in a drastic reduction in the quantity and accessibility of speech is rejected; and 4) the issue of balancing of equities is moot as the district court correctly determined that plaintiffs have not demonstrated a likelihood of s! uccess on the merits.
Continue reading

November 26, 2009.

Update from the Lexis Alert Service,

1. People v Johnson, 1541, 1748/99, SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, 2009 NY Slip Op 8682; 2009 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8510, November 24, 2009, Decided, November 24, 2009, Entered, THE LEXIS PAGINATION OF THIS DOCUMENT IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE PENDING RELEASE OF THE FINAL PUBLISHED VERSION., THIS OPINION IS UNCORRECTED AND SUBJECT TO REVISION BEFORE PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS.

Contact Information