Ah-ha! The Confrontation Clause is tested in 2010.
Is Supreme Court’s Lab Testimony Ruling at Risk? - News - ABA Journal: "On Jan. 11, the U.S. Supreme Court will consider when and how lab analysts must testify to satisfy a June ruling that holds crime lab evidence can’t be used at trial unless the analysts are subject to cross-examination. The issue in Briscoe v. Virginia is whether Virginia’s procedure meets the requirements of the June decision in Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, the New York Times reports. The state allows prosecutors to present paper reports to support their case, but requires the analysts to testify for cross-examination if the defense requests it. Defense lawyers say the analysts should be required to testify for the prosecution."
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Kentucky Law Review: KBA: 'KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE SEEKS ADEQUATE FUNDING FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM'
Finally, a positive sign that the Kentucky criminal justice system may get an influx of funding, appropriate to the problems it is intended to address: the balance between public safety and fairness.
Kentucky Law Review: KBA: 'KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE SEEKS ADEQUATE FUNDING FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM': "The Kentucky Bar Association’s Criminal Justice Roundtable recommended the development of a common effort to seek adequate funding for prosecutors and public defenders and outlined several “common principles” for reporting case numbers presented by the Kentucky Department of Public Advocacy (DPA), the state’s Unified Prosecutorial System comprised of County Attorneys and Commonwealth’s Attorneys under the chairmanship of the state Attorney General’s Office, and the state Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC)."
Kentucky Law Review: KBA: 'KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE SEEKS ADEQUATE FUNDING FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM': "The Kentucky Bar Association’s Criminal Justice Roundtable recommended the development of a common effort to seek adequate funding for prosecutors and public defenders and outlined several “common principles” for reporting case numbers presented by the Kentucky Department of Public Advocacy (DPA), the state’s Unified Prosecutorial System comprised of County Attorneys and Commonwealth’s Attorneys under the chairmanship of the state Attorney General’s Office, and the state Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC)."
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Supreme Court to Decide Privacy Rights of Texting Government Employees
Communications between officers, in the form of SMS txt messages, on their government phones may be "private."
Supreme Court to Decide Privacy Rights of Texting Government Employees: "The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to decide whether police officers have a constitutional right to privacy in their personal text messages sent on city-owned pagers. The Supreme Court will review a ruling by the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that found the officers have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the messages, the Associated Press reports. One officer, Ontario, Calif., police Sgt. Jeff Quon, had sent and received hundreds of personal messages, including some that were sexually explicit, according to the city. Quon and three fellow officers allege a Fourth Amendment violation by the city of…
"
CB radios are not private at all. But, police use them to communicate, unrecorded. This is as opposed to their government issued radio systems which are recorded.
Fair?
Supreme Court to Decide Privacy Rights of Texting Government Employees: "The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to decide whether police officers have a constitutional right to privacy in their personal text messages sent on city-owned pagers. The Supreme Court will review a ruling by the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that found the officers have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the messages, the Associated Press reports. One officer, Ontario, Calif., police Sgt. Jeff Quon, had sent and received hundreds of personal messages, including some that were sexually explicit, according to the city. Quon and three fellow officers allege a Fourth Amendment violation by the city of…
CB radios are not private at all. But, police use them to communicate, unrecorded. This is as opposed to their government issued radio systems which are recorded.
Fair?
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
December 15, 2009 :: Data backups, privacy, and reliability in the digital world
Any important data should be in three places, minimum. You cannot assume that online systems, even ones for which you pay, are invulnerable. For long range planning, in a 3-10 year plan for data security and reliability, you must retain control of your data, and data backups.
How Facebook Is Making Friending Obsolete - WSJ.com: "those who want a private experience on Facebook will have to work harder at it: if you inadvertently post a comment on a friends profile page that has been opened to the public, your comment will be public too."
Having privacy in the online world is a shrinking commodity. This WSJ.com article illustrates that profit is not assumed in huge sites like facebook, which the article points out is the 5th most popular, yet barely profitable.
IMPORTANT LESSON: Don't rely completely on online systems for your valuable data! (Yes, that lesson ended with an exclamation point.)
Remember when MySpace was king? Remember when AOL was super-king? How about Yahoo? Enron, Lehman Brothers, etc. I tell my wife, that moving photographs from the camera to the computer is the FIRST step. Do not delete the photos from the camera's memory card (backup #1). Then she needs to backup the computer using Apple's TimeMachine (backup #2). Then upload the original format photo somewhere which isn't facebook, such as picasaweb, where she can still access the original photo for mass download (backup #3). Then, she has not a single photo if her camera and computer (with its backup) are lost, for example, tornado or flood which takes the house with all contents.
The moral is that large companies fail, consumers' tastes change, technology develops, and your data is not safe exclusively in one place. My prior career had me responsible for hundreds of companies' data, consisting of websites, databases, and draft designs, plus our own financial data, including accounting, accounts, contacts, etc. When I drafted backup systems for my own organization, I was nervous about data loss when I saw a single backup fail. Because backup tapes degrade with time and CD's/DVD's can be easily damaged, I used several systems to back each other up. Drives mirrored each other online (backup #1). Mirror images of working hard-drives backed up crucial data every night onto offline disks (backup #2), backups of those were made onto tapes (backup #3), tapes were rotated off site in case of fire (backup #4), and some data was backed up to remote servers across the net (backup #5). More than one backup, so that any one failure, or two linked systems could fail, and no one would loose data.
Law firms are in a strange position of having to have absolute reliability for data, but it MUST remain confidential. Enter encryption for remote, cloud-based backups. Incremental backups keep the cost down on a recurring basis, while the firm retains control over backups and restore ability.
People's individual's computers in a firm scares me quite a bit, because much of their work, their data, is not backed up at all. Weak data security policy is one where the user has to do something. Where a network drive is provided and users are encouraged to back up their work, a computer is not replaceable within a day or so in case of "sledgehammer syndrome." I ask, "if I take a sledgehammer to your computer, how long would it take to be working on another computer, having all your data back?" It's a good, fair question with individual computers. With Apple's TimeMachine, right now, I can be up and running within two hours with a new computer with every bookmark, every file, every blog entry, and almost no lost time.
Relying on one backup is not good enough. Relying on people to back things up is the equivalent of free-solo rockclimbing: as long as nothing bad happens, it's cheap, enjoyable, and care free. My advice to both groups: enjoy it, just realize that one slip and you're through.
How Facebook Is Making Friending Obsolete - WSJ.com: "those who want a private experience on Facebook will have to work harder at it: if you inadvertently post a comment on a friends profile page that has been opened to the public, your comment will be public too."
Having privacy in the online world is a shrinking commodity. This WSJ.com article illustrates that profit is not assumed in huge sites like facebook, which the article points out is the 5th most popular, yet barely profitable.
IMPORTANT LESSON: Don't rely completely on online systems for your valuable data! (Yes, that lesson ended with an exclamation point.)
Remember when MySpace was king? Remember when AOL was super-king? How about Yahoo? Enron, Lehman Brothers, etc. I tell my wife, that moving photographs from the camera to the computer is the FIRST step. Do not delete the photos from the camera's memory card (backup #1). Then she needs to backup the computer using Apple's TimeMachine (backup #2). Then upload the original format photo somewhere which isn't facebook, such as picasaweb, where she can still access the original photo for mass download (backup #3). Then, she has not a single photo if her camera and computer (with its backup) are lost, for example, tornado or flood which takes the house with all contents.
The moral is that large companies fail, consumers' tastes change, technology develops, and your data is not safe exclusively in one place. My prior career had me responsible for hundreds of companies' data, consisting of websites, databases, and draft designs, plus our own financial data, including accounting, accounts, contacts, etc. When I drafted backup systems for my own organization, I was nervous about data loss when I saw a single backup fail. Because backup tapes degrade with time and CD's/DVD's can be easily damaged, I used several systems to back each other up. Drives mirrored each other online (backup #1). Mirror images of working hard-drives backed up crucial data every night onto offline disks (backup #2), backups of those were made onto tapes (backup #3), tapes were rotated off site in case of fire (backup #4), and some data was backed up to remote servers across the net (backup #5). More than one backup, so that any one failure, or two linked systems could fail, and no one would loose data.
Law firms are in a strange position of having to have absolute reliability for data, but it MUST remain confidential. Enter encryption for remote, cloud-based backups. Incremental backups keep the cost down on a recurring basis, while the firm retains control over backups and restore ability.
People's individual's computers in a firm scares me quite a bit, because much of their work, their data, is not backed up at all. Weak data security policy is one where the user has to do something. Where a network drive is provided and users are encouraged to back up their work, a computer is not replaceable within a day or so in case of "sledgehammer syndrome." I ask, "if I take a sledgehammer to your computer, how long would it take to be working on another computer, having all your data back?" It's a good, fair question with individual computers. With Apple's TimeMachine, right now, I can be up and running within two hours with a new computer with every bookmark, every file, every blog entry, and almost no lost time.
Relying on one backup is not good enough. Relying on people to back things up is the equivalent of free-solo rockclimbing: as long as nothing bad happens, it's cheap, enjoyable, and care free. My advice to both groups: enjoy it, just realize that one slip and you're through.
Monday, December 14, 2009
Subpoena Facebook Information | Lawyerist
Good information to have, in case it's needed:
Subpoena Facebook Information | Lawyerist: "One of our commenters on Leora’s Facebook sleuthing post asked how to go about getting information from Facebook pursuant to a subpoena for a court case. I followed up with Facebook, and got the contact information to (1) preserve information, and (2) get ahold of it. Here is the address and fax where you should send your subpoena or court order:
Facebook
Attn: Security Department
1601 South California Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94304
fax: 650.644.3229"
Subpoena Facebook Information | Lawyerist: "One of our commenters on Leora’s Facebook sleuthing post asked how to go about getting information from Facebook pursuant to a subpoena for a court case. I followed up with Facebook, and got the contact information to (1) preserve information, and (2) get ahold of it. Here is the address and fax where you should send your subpoena or court order:
Attn: Security Department
1601 South California Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94304
fax: 650.644.3229"
Tasers are not safe!
Despite their use against EVERY officer who carries one as a matter of training, tasers are "less than lethal" weapons. They are not "non-lethal." It's a very important difference.
in reference to: Sword-wielding man dies after being Tasered by Hampton police -- dailypress.com (view on Google Sidewiki)
in reference to: Sword-wielding man dies after being Tasered by Hampton police -- dailypress.com (view on Google Sidewiki)
Saturday, December 12, 2009
Does Kentucky Law protect a fetus from mother's cocaine use?
Currently in front of the Kentucky Supreme Court. This is scary if you support a woman's rights to do with her body what she wants.
in reference to: State-Journal.com - Does law protect fetuses from mothers' cocaine use? (view on Google Sidewiki)Constitutional Crisis in Maricopa County, Arizona
Sheriff Joe and his army are on the march.
in reference to:"Students of the Constitution have always realized that our tripartite government relies on the good will of the executive (which controls the use of violence) and the legislative (which controls the money) to do what the judiciary (which controls bupkus) says. When the guys with all of the guns stop listening to the guys in black robes, they stop participating in our Constitutionally-formed government and becomes no better than warlords."
- Defending People » Why Maricopa County Matters (view on Google Sidewiki)
Worst Police Misconduct Videos of 2009
It's difficult to watch some of these videos, how police officers can be suddenly so violent, then claim, along with their departments, that they were within policy. Reminds me of a good friend's oft quoted line from "south park," where hunting endangered animals is perfectly legal when the fatal shot to the beast is proceeded with the exclamation, "Look out, he's charging!"
in reference to:"As the year closes I thought that one way to look back at the year in police misconduct would be too review some of the videos of police misconduct we’ve seen in the news… and let you tell us which ones you thought were the worst."
- Worst Police Misconduct Videos of 2009 – Reader Poll « Injustice Everywhere (view on Google Sidewiki)
Dec 12, 2009 :: Florida Ethics advisory opinion limits facebook friends for judges
The Florida Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee opines on ethical issues relating to judges' use of on line social networking sites. A summary of the opinion from the committeeThis is an interesting advisory opinion. The implications are that lawyers cannot befriend judges in Florida. What about golf & tennis clubs?
Friday, December 11, 2009
Dec 11, 2009 :: Ethics of email confidentiality and iPhone security
This is a good article about data security from the standpoint of a law firm. When I worked in a legal clinic at my university, the policy warned about using email systems outside the school system, which used Micrsoft Exchange (2003, I think). Their thoughts were that an off site email system would compromise security, allowing people outside the firm to access confidential information. My reasoning in using outside email systems, regardless, was __fold. First, checking several email systems would mean that I would check email less frequently, if at all, so I would miss important communications. Second, systems like hotmail, yahoo, and gmail have privacy policies in place: the administrators do not access email, and a security break there is just as likely as a security break at a university, except university-based hackers feel more comfortable hacking into their own school's servers because (1) it's home, (2) it's their own school's computer, where's the harm, and (3) they are inside a firewall, thus giving them more access. Lastly, the clinic's mail server was, in fact, the university's computer for mail which handled the entire law school. As such, a breach by any law student would compromise the clinic's communications too. Well, unless a mail server is within the network bounds of the firm, the extent of vulnerability is a slight matter of degree. I often made the comparison of email security is far better than leaving client files in my car, which I never did, luckily, as my car was broken into for its stereo.
How many small firms know anything about the security of their mail server? How many firms encrypt their communications between attorneys and clients? Moreover, "work product" between an attorney and his in-house investigator with emails flying all over the internet. Wiretapping statutes may make interception a crime, but ethically, is the firm still open to a liability when ALL their mail is sitting at a small internet service provider's server, just waiting for a bored technician to go on an email reading spree?
From iPhone Security: "The problem is not iPhone security. The problem is security. Period. This includes computer security, smartphone security, physical office security, social engineering security, etc. If an attorney puts confidential information anywhere — be it on an iPhone, a laptop, or a legal pad — the attorney needs to be very cautious about what happens to that information. If you lose your briefcase, there is little you can do besides retrace your steps and hope to find it. If you lose an iPhone, you have the option of trying to determine its location using a service like MobileMe or you can immediately tell your system administrator (or use MobileMe) to remotely wipe the iPhone. It won't work if a thief has already removed the SIM chip, but at least those are options that you don't have with a lost briefcase or even a lost laptop. [...] Having said that, if you are an attorney using an iPhone, please use your iPhone's passcode lock feature, and please don't expose your iPhone to potential trouble by jailbreaking your iPhone."
How many small firms know anything about the security of their mail server? How many firms encrypt their communications between attorneys and clients? Moreover, "work product" between an attorney and his in-house investigator with emails flying all over the internet. Wiretapping statutes may make interception a crime, but ethically, is the firm still open to a liability when ALL their mail is sitting at a small internet service provider's server, just waiting for a bored technician to go on an email reading spree?
From iPhone Security: "The problem is not iPhone security. The problem is security. Period. This includes computer security, smartphone security, physical office security, social engineering security, etc. If an attorney puts confidential information anywhere — be it on an iPhone, a laptop, or a legal pad — the attorney needs to be very cautious about what happens to that information. If you lose your briefcase, there is little you can do besides retrace your steps and hope to find it. If you lose an iPhone, you have the option of trying to determine its location using a service like MobileMe or you can immediately tell your system administrator (or use MobileMe) to remotely wipe the iPhone. It won't work if a thief has already removed the SIM chip, but at least those are options that you don't have with a lost briefcase or even a lost laptop. [...] Having said that, if you are an attorney using an iPhone, please use your iPhone's passcode lock feature, and please don't expose your iPhone to potential trouble by jailbreaking your iPhone."
Sheriff Joe has given Judge Donahoe both barrels by charging him with felonies in retaliation for jailing his deputy.
Sheriff Joe has given Judge Donahoe both barrels by charging him with felonies in retaliation for jailing his deputy.
November 20, the judge sentenced a Maricopa County court security deputy to jail for refusing to apologize to the defense attorney from whom he stole documents out of her client's file. It was a contempt order. Now the Sheriff has gotten him back. Maricopa County Arizona has a justice system which is OUT OF CONTROL.
in reference to: Judge Criminally Charged re Court Rulings in Battle for Control of Ariz. County - News - ABA Journal (view on Google Sidewiki)
UPDATE: See As Maricopa Turns: The Insurrection at simplejustice.com for a great analysis of what's happening in Maricopa, AZ. No proof against the judge. That is, no evidence the judge accepted any money, according to the county attorney who helped bring the charges. They explain the charges are valid because Arizona has broad definitions of what constitutes bribery. Huh?
November 20, the judge sentenced a Maricopa County court security deputy to jail for refusing to apologize to the defense attorney from whom he stole documents out of her client's file. It was a contempt order. Now the Sheriff has gotten him back. Maricopa County Arizona has a justice system which is OUT OF CONTROL.
in reference to: Judge Criminally Charged re Court Rulings in Battle for Control of Ariz. County - News - ABA Journal (view on Google Sidewiki)
UPDATE: See As Maricopa Turns: The Insurrection at simplejustice.com for a great analysis of what's happening in Maricopa, AZ. No proof against the judge. That is, no evidence the judge accepted any money, according to the county attorney who helped bring the charges. They explain the charges are valid because Arizona has broad definitions of what constitutes bribery. Huh?
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Dec 10, 2009 :: Miranda Rights to be revamped? MORE rights?
According to Associated Press article in the LA Times (LATimes.com), SCOTUS may require police to "explicitly advise criminal suspects that their lawyer can be present during any interrogation."
in reference to: Venerable 'You have the right' warning in store for possible high-level, high-court rewrite -- latimes.com (view on Google Sidewiki)Good article on why lawyers need local twitter lists
Lawyerist.com strikes again with a great reason to follow or start a state specific twitter list.
While I'm a sporadic twitter user, when I use it, reading those I follow, it's interesting.
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Dec 8, 2009 :: SCOTUS Makes Emergency Aid exception easier for police
The Fourth Amendment got a little smaller today when SCOTUS makes the "emergency aid" exception to police making a warrantless entry into a house less restrictive.
in reference to: SCOTUS 4A Entry Decision - Crime and Consequences Blog (view on Google Sidewiki)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)