|
|
|
Fla. court asked to keep ex-FBI agent's conviction
Law Firm Legal News |
2014/06/13 15:36
|
Florida prosecutors are asking an appeals court to reconsider its decision to toss the murder conviction and prison sentence for a former FBI agent in a mob-style killing linked to jailed Boston mobster James "Whitey" Bulger.
The Miami-Dade State Attorney's Office filed a motion Thursday in the case of ex-agent John Connolly. A panel of the 3rd District Court of Appeal last month ruled that Connolly's second-degree murder conviction was barred by the statute of limitations because a firearms enhancement was improperly applied.
Connolly is serving 40 years in the 1982 slaying of Miami gambling executive John Callahan. Although a hit man shot Callahan, testimony showed Connolly fed information to Bulger and others that led to his killing.
Prosecutors say the appeals decision was wrong and are seeking a rehearing. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Levin & Curlett, LLC - Baltimore Criminal Defense Lawyer Services
Law Firm Legal News |
2014/06/06 16:42
|
Levin & Curlett, LLC was formed by former prosecutors. With extensive experience in all facets of criminal and civil litigation, Levin & Curlett LLC has the trial experience necessary to work effectively with clients to achieve their goals. They represent clients who are involved in criminal proceedings as targets, subjects, witnesses, recipients of grand jury subpoenas, or defendants.
Levin & Curlett LLC defends state and federal charges for all manner of non-white collar crimes, including felonies and misdemeanors. We have extensive experience in cases involving:
- Conspiracy
- Racketeering (RICO)
- Homicide
- Sex Crimes
- Assault
- Theft/Embezzlement
- Driving Under the Influence/Driving While Impaired
- Weapons Possession
- Narcotics Possession and Trafficking
- Cases Involving Juveniles
If you're in need of Baltimore Criminal Defense Lawyers, call the Levin Curlett, LLC today.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court: Company didn't induce patent infringement
Law Firm Legal News |
2014/06/03 14:49
|
A unanimous Supreme Court ruled Monday that a company is not liable for inducing patent infringement if someone other than the company carries out some of the steps leading to infringement.
The justices unanimously ruled Monday that Internet content delivery company Limelight Networks Inc. did not infringe on the patented system for managing images and video owned by rival Akamai Technologies Inc.
Akamai claimed Limelight used some of its patented methods for speeding content delivery, and then illegally encouraged its customers to carry out the remaining steps. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit agreed, but the Supreme Court reversed.
Justice Samuel Alito said all the steps for patent infringement must be performed by a single party. Since there was no direct infringement, Alito said there could be no inducement.
The case drew interest from tech giants including Google and Oracle, which have been sued frequently by so-called "patent trolls," companies that buy patents and force businesses to pay license fees or face costly litigation. They had urged the high court to overturn the Federal Circuit in order to limit the growing number of patent infringement lawsuits.
In another patent case Monday, the high court also ruled unanimously that a medical device company's patent on a heart-rate monitor used with exercise equipment was too ambiguous to pass muster. Biosig Instruments had sued competitor Nautilus Inc., for allegedly infringing its monitor's design. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Arkansas court says judge went too far on voter ID
Law Firm Legal News |
2014/05/16 16:52
|
The Arkansas Supreme Court tossed out a judge's ruling striking down the state's voter ID law on Wednesday, but stopped short of ruling on the constitutionality of the measure.
In a 5-2 ruling, justices vacated a Pulaski County judge's decision that the law violates Arkansas' constitution. Pulaski County Circuit Judge Tim Fox had struck down the law in a case that had focused on how absentee ballots are handled under the law, but justices stayed his ruling while they considered an appeal.
Fox also has ruled the law unconstitutional in a separate case but said he wouldn't block its enforcement during this month's primary. That ruling is being appealed to the high court.
Justices said Fox didn't have the authority to strike down the law in the case focusing on absentee ballots. They noted that there was no request before Fox in the case to strike down the law. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
European court: Google must yield on personal info
Law Firm Legal News |
2014/05/13 15:16
|
People should have some say over the results that pop up when they conduct a search of their own name online, Europe's highest court said Tuesday.
In a landmark decision, The Court of Justice of the European Union said Google must listen and sometimes comply when individuals ask the Internet search giant to remove links to newspaper articles or websites containing their personal information.
Campaigners say the ruling effectively backs individual privacy rights over the freedom of information.
In an advisory judgment that will impact on all search engines, including Yahoo and Microsoft's Bing, the court said a search on a person's name yields a results page that amounts to an individual profile. Under European privacy law, it said people should be able to ask to have links to private information in that 'profile' removed.
It is not clear how exactly the court envisions Google and others handling complaints, and Google said it is still studying the advisory ruling, which cannot be appealed.
In the ruling, the court said people "may address such a request directly to the operator of the search engine ... which must then duly examine its merits." The right is not absolute, as search engines must weigh "the legitimate interest of Internet users potentially interested in having access to that information" against the right to privacy and protection of personal data. |
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News World RSS Feed
