Ruling favors suspected Calif. gang members
Criminal Law
Authorities in California's Orange County violated the constitutional rights of dozens of suspected gang members when they enforced a gang injunction without giving them a chance to defend themselves in court, a federal judge ruled on Tuesday.
U.S. District Court Judge Valerie Baker Fairbank's ruling favors those who challenged a temporary gang injunction issued in February 2009, notifying suspected members of the Orange Varrio Cypress gang that they will be barred from associating in public, wearing gang clothing or being out late at night within a roughly 4-square-mile area of Orange.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California sued, arguing that when some 60 people challenged their inclusion in the temporary injunction prosecutors removed their names. Those people were nonetheless named in the permanent injunction.
Fairbank ruled that the action violated those people's rights to defend against allegations that they have gang affiliations. She ordered police and prosecutors not to enforce the injunction against them.
Related listings
-
Court to reconsider case of Super Bowl threat
Criminal Law 05/10/2011A federal appeals court will reconsider the case of an Arizona man accused of planning a massacre at the 2008 Super Bowl before changing his mind.Kurt Havelock was convicted in 2008 of mailing threatening messages, but a three-judge panel of the 9th ...
-
Court for Fla. woman charged in husband's NY death
Criminal Law 05/06/2011Federal prosecutors have been turning up the heat on a Florida woman accused of arranging the 2009 killings of her millionaire husband and mother-in-law. Narcy Novack of Fort Lauderdale and her brother, Cristobal Veliz of Brooklyn, N.Y., are due in c...
-
NY man pleads guilty in 2005 samurai sword slaying
Criminal Law 05/03/2011A man about to start a second trial for the 2005 samurai sword slaying of his sleeping stepfather, whom he had accused of sexually molesting him, pleaded guilty Monday to manslaughter.Zachary Gibian, 24, will be sentenced later this month to 25 years...
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.