Uncategorized

Surveillance Video- When It Comes In and When It Doesn’t

by

Video evidence authentication has received a fair amount of treatment on this blog. The topic remains an area of practical significance given the prevalence of video evidence in criminal trials and how common it is for the prosecution’s case to hinge on the admission of video. We are increasingly a video-focused society. Between home security cam, doorbell cam, body-worn cam, in-car cam, pole cam, and even parking lot cam, juries increasingly expect to see video, whether the incident in question occurred outside a home, near a business, or on the roadside.

In this post, I will focus on surveillance video.

Read more

blank

News Roundup

by

On Monday, the Louisiana Senate unanimously passed a bill that would make it a crime to knowingly import, transport, buy, sell, manufacture, or possess a child sex doll. According to proponents of the bill, the dolls resemble children 12 and younger and are used for sexual gratification (for all the Law & Order: SVU fans, this issue was illustrated in an episode of the current season). Depending on the circumstances, intent, and whether or not the doll is imported, a conviction could result in up to two years imprisonment and a fine of up to $20,000. A number of other states have passed laws outlawing child sex dolls since 2019, including Arizona, Florida, Hawaii, South Dakota, and Tennessee.

Read more

blank

Immigration Consequences of DV Offenses: Stalking and Violation of DVPOs

by

Last week, in the first part of this two-part series, I talked about the “crime of domestic violence” ground of deportability for noncitizens and what role convictions of North Carolina offenses play in triggering that ground. This post covers immigration consequences of the “stalking” and “violation of protection orders” grounds of deportability.

Read more

blank

News Roundup

by

Raleigh is ending its red-light camera program after two decades of operation. The News and Observer has the story here. Red-light camera programs across North Carolina have steadily folded following court rulings that their funding model (in which the camera vendor is paid more than 10 percent of the net proceeds of fines) runs afoul of the fines and forfeiture clause of the state constitution.

Of course, the city still wants people to stop at red lights. Last year, it installed reflective backplates, a border on traffic signals to make them stand out, at red-light-camera-intersection signals.

Keep reading for more local, national, and international criminal and court-related news.

Read more

blank

Immigration Consequences of DV Offenses: Crimes of Domestic Violence

by

A noncitizen can lose status—that is, the right to be in the U.S.—and be forced to leave if he or she comes within a ground of deportability. In general, the grounds of deportability apply to noncitizens who have been lawfully “admitted.” This includes both lawful permanent residents (“green card” holders) and holders of temporary, nonimmigrant visas.

There are several criminal grounds of deportability in the federal immigration statutes, provided in Title 8, Section 1227 of the United States Code. One of these grounds is conviction of a crime of domestic violence. In order to be a crime of domestic violence under federal immigration law, the offense must meet the federal definition of a “crime of violence” under 18 U.S.C. 16 and must also be against a person in a domestic relationship with the defendant. This provision of the statute also includes deportation for crimes of child abuse, child neglect, or child abandonment, but discussion of those grounds is outside the scope of this post.

This post is the first in a two-part series and examines immigration consequences of convictions of offenses involving domestic violence under North Carolina law. It is not intended to be a comprehensive analysis of immigration law; rather, it assesses the immigration consequences of selected North Carolina offenses and only within the scope of the domestic violence ground of deportability.

Read more

News Roundup

by

A bill to “recriminalize” the possession of certain dangerous drugs is moving forward in Oregon. Oregon became the first state to decriminalize the possession of drugs such as cocaine, methamphetamine, heroin, and fentanyl when voters approved of a 2020 ballot initiative, with 58% in favor. If Governor Tina Kotek signs the new legislation (she states she will), possession of these drugs will again be classified as a misdemeanor. The new law would provide for a range of responses, including treatment alternatives to incarceration, diversionary options such as conditional discharges, and up to 180 days in jail. Proponents argue that the surge in fentanyl overdoses requires that penalties be reinstated, while others argue that decriminalization was not the cause of increased fentanyl use.

Read on for more criminal law news.

Read more

blank

Congratulations to Newly Certified Magistrates

by

Magistrates are often referred to as the “first face” of the judicial system for most citizens. They serve the public with professionalism, all while keeping abreast of the rapidly changing civil and criminal laws. In 2021, their training requirements were increased by the legislature from 12 hours every two years to 12 hours every year. … Read more

News Roundup

by

Bankman-Fried sentencing. Regular readers know that I’m interested in the criminal case against Sam Bankman-Fried, founder of the fallen cryptocurrency exchange FTX. I even read a book about Bankman-Fried, which I reviewed here. He has been convicted in federal court and his sentencing hearing is set for March 28. The United States Probation Office has calculated his Guideline sentence as 110 years in prison, and has recommended a downward variance to 100 years. (They temper justice with mercy at the United States Probation Office.) Bankman-Fried’s attorneys have responded with a 90-page sentencing memorandum, arguing that Bankman-Fried is a selfless philanthropist at heart; that there are no victims of his crimes because it now appears that there were sufficient assets in FTX to pay all customers and creditors; and that a proper application of the Guidelines calls for a sentence of approximately 6 years but that given various mitigating circumstances, “a sentence that returns [Bankman-Fried] promptly to a productive role in society would . . . comply with the purposes of sentencing.” Stay tuned for further developments! And keep reading for more news.

Read more