Court rules that magistrate may preside
Court Alerts
[##_1L|1383336425.jpg|width="130" height="90" alt=""|_##]The Supreme Court ruled Monday that a federal magistrate may preside over jury selection in criminal cases, as long as the attorney for a defendant explicitly permits it. The 8-1 decision came in a drug-trafficking case from Laredo, Texas, where a lawyer for defendant Homero Gonzalez allowed a magistrate to oversee the questioning of prospective jurors. On appeal, Gonzalez argued that the court should have obtained his consent before a magistrate presided.
In the majority opinion, Justice Anthony Kennedy said federal law allows the practice and that "this is not a case where the magistrate judge is asked to preside or make determinations after the trial has commenced." Justice Clarence Thomas dissented, saying, "Whatever their virtues, magistrate judges are no substitute" for U.S. District Court judges.
U.S. District judges are appointed by the president, confirmed by the Senate, have life tenure and their salaries cannot be reduced. Magistrates, appointed by U.S. District judges, have no such protection.
A Mexican citizen, Gonzalez does not speak fluent English and did not have an interpreter at the bench conference where his attorney consented to designating the magistrate for the task.
Ordinarily, U.S. District Court judges participate in selecting juries for criminal and civil trials, a process known as voir dire.
Lawyers regard voir dire as one of the most important parts of a case because it often uncovers biases, leading to excluding members of the group of citizens from which a jury is selected.
There are more than 500 federal magistrate judges, who serve eight-year terms and are recommended by a citizen's merit screening committee. The magistrate setup was begun by Congress in 1968, expanding on a system that is 175 years old.
Faced with increasing caseloads, the federal judiciary assigns an array of duties to magistrates. Those include initial proceedings in criminal cases, presiding over some minor criminal trials and trials of civil cases with the consent of both sides.
Related listings
-
Driver found guilty in crash that killed 5 in Ohio
Court Alerts 05/12/2008A man has been found guilty in a wrong-way crash in Toledo, Ohio that killed a mother and four children.Police say Michael Gagnon was driving drunk and in the wrong direction Dec. 30 when his pickup truck hit a minivan filled with eight people return...
-
LA judge rules in favor of Notorious B.I.G.'s family
Court Alerts 05/09/2008A judge has reinstated a wrongful-death lawsuit brought by the family of slain rapper Notorious B.I.G., reversing an earlier decision to dismiss the case.U.S. District Judge Florence-Marie Cooper threw out the lawsuit March 21 after determining the f...
-
Man convicted of stalking actress Uma Thurman
Court Alerts 05/08/2008The former mental patient convicted yesterday of stalking actress Uma Thurman was ordered by a judge to be kept in jail for a month to undergo psychiatric examination before he is sentenced.Jack Jordan, 37, of Maryland, showed no emotion as a jury in...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.