Monday, March 6, 2017

Sign Your Life Away


  • A family that pleaded guilty to misdemeanors were listed in a database of felons. [RJ]
  • Attorney Brian Egan writes about why successful couples need a pre-nup. [Vegas Inc.]
  • What else is going on out there this week?

33 comments:

  1. What happened to Jeff German?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. RJ promoted him to "investigative reporter," so he is now spending little to no time producing daily stories. Instead working on long-term projects.

      Delete
  2. The US Attorneys Office not giving 2 shits about playing by the rules and screwing people over? You don't say.

    ReplyDelete
  3. NLV Municipal Court Judge Catherine Ramsey has officially resigned.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Forgive me if I'm not sympathetic about someone not being able to add to their gun collection. Good grief.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah its just their constitutional rights and specifically tarring them with something that is not true. I agree, small taters stuff.

      Delete
    2. What about voting? I'm not a gun nut, but rights are rights.

      Delete
    3. Being an ex-felon triggers a LOT of restrictions on one's rights and places a lot of hurdles in one's path when obtaining employment. It also makes one automatically a non-credible witness in the eyes of a jury.
      That, and, those silly things like not being able to exercise various constitutional rights.

      Delete
  5. I hope everyone has a excellent day.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Right back at you, Bromigo.

      Delete
  6. This morning the US Supreme Court reversed a Nevada death penalty decision because the Nevada Supreme Court did not apply the correct legal standard on an issue concerning judicial bias. Not even Justice Thomas dissented.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Embarrassment double whammy on a national stage: 1) corrupt state court judge (allegedly); and 2) incompetent Supreme Court Justices. Not a good day for the reputation of Nevada jurisprudence.

      Delete
  7. Case name and citation?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was trying to think which judge this was - based on the dates this must go all the way back to Bongiovanni maybe? That's a hell of a long time to wait.

      Delete
    2. 02/05/1996
      Jury Trial (10:00 AM) ()
      TRIAL BY JURY Court Clerk: JOSEPHINE BOHN Reporter/Recorder: RENEE SILVAGGIO/GERRI LAPTHORNE Heard By: Bongiovanni, Gerard J.

      Delete
    3. Yep, and Steve Wolfson was counsel for the defendant at trial. Wonder if his office will be conflicted off now

      Delete
    4. The trial was only 21 years ago. Slow wheels of justice?

      Delete
  8. If the Judge was a target of the feds (he was acquitted, the case against him was weak and never should have been brought), how would he be biased against the defendant. The appellate courts are crazy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You might have a point if he had been acquitted before the death penalty trial. It is the fact that the same entity that is in the process of determining the judge's fate is appearing in front of him in the case that creates an intolerable risk of bias.

      Delete
    2. Never do understand why judges don't just recuse themselves when asked. Why create an issue?

      Delete
    3. Because then all you would have to do to get rid of a judge you don't like is make up an issue and ask them to recuse themselves. Leads to pretty easy forum shopping.

      Delete
    4. Civil litigants just pay some money and pre-empt. That sounds like forum shopping. Criminal defendants should have the same ability

      Delete
    5. 1:35 PM--The murder case was a state case before him in state court. He was the subject of a federal prosecution by the feds. Just not sure of the time line. It has been so long.

      Delete
    6. He was a subject of federal prosecution, but the DA's office was helping in the investigation. Not hard to imagine them coming after him harder if he started issuing unfavorable rulings.

      Delete
    7. @4:50pm - Finally, that is the first sensible explanation, and in layman's terms, as to why this was bias per the USSC.

      Delete
    8. Still a ridiculous result. The evidence of guilt was overwhelming. A murderer gets a new trial twenty something years later because the judge might have been biased or could been biased or should have recused himself? How is that fair to the State and to the victims families.

      Delete
    9. The Nevada Supreme Court could have fixed this in 1996

      Delete
    10. How is it ridiculous to address the potential problem of wrongfully admitted evidence because the judge wanted to curry favor with the DA's office? If there was evidence favorable to the defense that was excluded for the same reason? Sure those are issues within the court's discretion, but he was questioning whether the court was actually being fair. The problem is that it is impossible to tell now, because the NSC didn't answer the simple question: if what this guy says is true, does that create a conflict?

      Delete
    11. Ridiculous is only that it took 20+ years to give the guy a fair trial.

      Delete
  9. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000790903/article/raiders-secure-financing-for-potential-las-vegas-stadium

    ReplyDelete
  10. I hate judges. They disgust me. Like their shit doesn't stink and they are immortal; ignorant egomaniacs.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How do you really feel? You sound like someone who takes on a bunch of crappy cases and then get angry b/c you can't get a judge (let alone a jury) to go along with you.

      Delete