Category Archives: Courts

Federal Judge Says California Attorney General Kamala Harris Wrong on Gun Control Laws

Posted on by

Court denies Harris’ arguments and agrees with gun rights group The Calguns Foundation, says state’s firearm waiting period laws likely fail to meet Constitutional muster

ROSEVILLE, CA — In a rejection of California Attorney General Kamala Harris’ stance on the rights of law-abiding gun owners, Senior Federal District Court Judge Anthony W. Ishii denied Harris’ motion for summary judgement today in a federal civil rights lawsuit filed by The Calguns Foundation, indicating that California’s 10-day “waiting period” gun laws are likely unconstitutional.

“The fact that a federal judge saw these laws for what they are — baseless restraints on the exercise of a fundamental civil right — is monumental,” explained Gene Hoffman, Chairman of The Calguns Foundation. “California’s waiting period laws for those who own guns is not Constitutional and this order really underlines the point.”

In his order, Judge Ishii said that Harris has “not presented sufficient evidence to show that the [10-day waiting period laws] passes either intermediate or strict scrutiny.”

About the laws being challenged in the case, named plaintiff Jeff Silvester of Hanford, California, said, “I have a license to carry a loaded firearm across the State.It is ridiculous that I have to wait another 10 days to pick up a new firearm when I’m standing there in the gun store lawfully carrying one the whole time.”

“This is certainly an exciting development in Second Amendment case law,” noted Brandon Combs, an individual plaintiff in the case and the Executive Director of The Calguns Foundation. “If our Constitution means what it says, then California’s gun waiting period laws have to be overturned and law-abiding people must be allowed to exercise their rights without irrational infringements.”

Read more at The Calguns Foundation

From the Bench: From the ashes…

Posted on by

rob-krombeenby Justice of the Peace Robert Krombeen

This past month on June 28th, while at the judicial conference in Phoenix, I sat down with Judge Anna Mary Glaab from the Yarnell Justice Court and spoke with her about the fond memories I had of Yarnell while working for Yavapai County back in the 80’s. Neither of us knew at that time that lightning had just struck a mountain and started a fire that would change the community and so many lives forever. Judge Glaab reported this week that two of the four members of her staff lost their homes and possessions. The fire totally caught the community and Judge Glaab’s court by surprise, and now she is working diligently to continue and bring back services to the court. Courts in Baghdad, Prescott, and Mayer are scrambling to provide services for the most pressing and time-sensitive matters at that court. Please continue to keep the community and those families in your thoughts and prayers, as now the challenges of the losses really come to light as families attempt to rebuild their lives.

Because of possibility for that and other types of interruptions at our court, the Williams Municipal and Justice Courts have been working together with Coconino County Court Administration to develop our Continuous Operations (COOP) plan to enable our courts to continue providing services during any unanticipated emergency or contingency. The plan would cover a wide range of possible disruptions including forest fire, winter blizzard, gas leak or other evacuation, court facility structural failure, or other similar events which would cause a major interruption to the operations of our courts. COOP plans are being developed by proactive courts across the state and are being implemented in all of the Coconino County Court facilities. We have two off-site court locations identified and approved for our use in the event of an emergency, and a cache of all court supplies required for continued operations will be stored and maintained at a location outside of our facility.

Court Manager Jennifer Carter has selected Williams High School student Jaiden Pona to be our second high school intern during the upcoming school year. Jaiden joins Devin McNelly in the second year of our internship program at the courts. We applaud Jennifer’s investment of energy and effort in our community’s youth by providing a learning environment and an opportunity for our students to experience the criminal justice system and the operation of our courts.

You Can Now Bear Arms in a Post Office Parking Lot

Posted on by

A federal judge rules it is OK to bring a gun to a USPS parking lot, but not inside the facility. Fill in your ‘going postal’ pun here.

By Brian Resnick

Tab Bonidy was polite enough to ask before he brought a gun into a Colorado post office. In 2010 his lawyer sent a letter to USPS asking whether Bonidy would be prosecuted if he brought a firearm inside the facility or left one in his car while, let’s say, purchasing stamps. And he got a response.

According to Thursday’s ruling by District Judge Richard Matsch, the USPS legal counsel responded to Bonidy, saying, “Regulations governing conduct on postal property prevent (Bonidy) from carrying firearms, openly or concealed, onto any real property under the charge and control of the Postal Service.”

She was referring to Title 39 of the Federal Regulations, which dates back to 1972:

Weapons and explosives. Notwithstanding the provisions of any other law, rule or regulation, no person while on postal property may carry firearms, other dangerous or deadly weapons, or explosives, either openly or concealed, or store the same on postal property, except for official purposes.

Feeling his rights were being violated, Bonidy teamed up with the National Association for Gun Rights to file suit against this provision.

Read more at the National Journal

Supreme Court Tears Into Fifth Amendment, Rules Silence Can Be Used Against You If Questioned

Posted on by

dissent-silencedScott Shackford

In a 5-4 decision the Supreme Court ruled today that a potential defendant’s silence can be used against him if he is being interviewed by police but is not arrested (and read his Miranda rights) and has not verbally invoked the protection of the Fifth Amendment.

Tim Lynch at the Cato Institute explains that the Salinas v. Texas case was intended to be about whether prosecutors during a trial could cast aspersions on a defendant’s silence during questioning that took place prior to arrest — prior to the defendent being told he had the right to remain silent. Instead, the Supreme Court determined that they wouldn’t need to rule on the matter because the defendant had never invoked the Fifth Amendment’s protection. This decision means that it’s the responsibility of the individual to know about the protections offered by the Fifth Amendment even prior to arrest and to actually verbally invoke it:

The Court said Salinas simply remained silent and did not “formally” invoke any constitutional right, so prosecutors could offer commentary to the jury. What’s most disturbing about the ruling is its discussion of “burdens.” The plurality put the onus on the individual, not the government. That is the profound error in the decision. As the dissenters noted, in the circumstances of the case, it was evident what Salinas was doing. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court has complicated the law for persons who are the most vulnerable–persons who lack education, persons who do not speak English very well, persons who may suffer from mental problems, and persons who may be under the influence of alcohol. This is a bad day for the Bill of Rights.

Read more at Prince Vega

Continuing court during emergency situations

Posted on by

tj-20130412-01WILLIAMS—The weight of snow has just collapsed the roof. The snow has caused a train to derail on Seventh street sparking a horrendous forest fire. The fire is melting the snow causing flooding. The flooding freezes over Railroad Avenue causing a semi to skid out of control into the building. Okay, not all of those things are likely to happen at one time, but something might happen to cause the evacuation of the Williams Justice Center. The staff of the Williams Justice Center will have to have a way to provide important court services after that.

The Williams Municipal and Justice Courts are working together with Coconino County Court Administration to develop our Continuous Operations (COOP) plan to enable our courts to continue providing services during any unanticipated emergency or contingency.

“The court has to be able to issue orders—court orders—and those things 24/7. We have to be able to provide orders of protection and other court orders during business hours and that take precedence in court,” Justice of the Peace Robert Krombeen explained.

“If somebody’s arrested in the city they have to be seen by the JP or a magistrate within twenty-four hours. They have to be. For a felony—a homicide, for example—they would be released in twenty-four hours. That’s required by law and the Arizona Constitution.”

The Flagstaff Court system has their own system as part of the County emergency plan. “They have the specifics of their plan in place where they have other sites in the greater Flagstaff area where they could set up their court, as well, so that they could maintain court within their precinct.”

Krombeen explained that our plan has two alternative sites within our precinct so that we can maintain court in this area. “If something really weird happened where it was going to be a longer term, we could potentially go to Flagstaff. But it’s our goal and our plan to set up to have those services provided right here.”

One of the sites being considered is the Coconino Community College building which is being turned over to the high school. It has facilities to allow video court similar to the facilities in the Williams Justice Center. The other location is the Clark Memorial Airport which has sufficient parking and Internet facilities that could allow the same function.

So if an emergency should occur in any of the areas serviced by the Williams Justice Center, do not try to take advantage of the situation. You will not pass go, you may loose $200 and you may go to jail.

Court sides with student in case over textbooks

Posted on by

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that textbooks and other goods made and sold abroad can be re-sold online and in discount stores without violating U.S. copyright law.

In a 6-3 opinion, the court threw out a copyright infringement award to publisher John Wiley & Sons against Thai graduate student Supap Kirtsaeng, who used eBay to resell copies of the publisher’s copyrighted books that his relatives first bought abroad at cut-rate prices.

Justice Stephen Breyer said in his opinion for the court that once goods are sold lawfully, whether in the U.S. or elsewhere, publishers and manufacturers lose the protection of U.S. copyright law.

“We hold that the ‘first sale’ doctrine applies to copies of a copyrighted work lawfully made abroad,” Breyer said.

Had the court come out the other way, it would have crimped the sale of many goods sold online and in discount stores, and it would have complicated the tasks of museums and libraries that contain works produced outside the United States, Breyer said. Retailers told the court that more than $2.3 trillion worth of foreign goods were imported in 2011, and that many of these goods were bought after they were first sold abroad, he said.

Read more at Yahoo! News

Upcoming Supreme Court case could affect Internet book sales

Posted on by

On the 29th, the Supreme Court will hear a case which could affect booksellers using Internet sites such as E-Bay and Amazon. In question is whether or not selling books printed in foreign countries can be sold through these outlets without the permission of the Copyright owner.

The Appeals Court for the 2nd Circuit in New York decided in John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Kirtsaeng, 654 F.3d 210, 99 U.S.P.Q.2d 1641, 2011 ILRC 2481 (2d Cir. 2011) that the first sale doctrine of the Copyright law does not include works made overseas. The first sale doctrine in effect since 1908 allows a person to purchase books for resale without limitations imposed by the Copyright owner.

The defendant in the 2nd Circuit court case, Supap Kirtsaeng moved to the U.S. from Thailand to attend college. The action alleges that Kirtsaeng then began to ship editions of textbooks printed by John Wiley & Sons in Asia and selling them on the Internet through E-Bay.

The Copyright holder, John Wiley and Sons, sued to stop the sales. The court decided that the first sale doctrine does not apply to works printed overseas.

Kirtsaeng is taking the case to the Supreme Court.

This could call into question whether or not you can sale books or other Copyrighted material that you purchased overseas while on vacation at a yard sale.

Grieving for Freedom

Posted on by

By Van Irion

Whether you realize it or not, all freedom-loving people are grieving our lost freedom this Independence Day. Psychologists teach that the first reaction to devastating loss is denial. When we lose something that we love, our minds initially deny the event in order to survive the shock. After denial comes bargaining, anger, depression, and finally acceptance. Each stage of grief allows our minds to absorb the new reality and grieve the loss of something cherished.

Last week’s devastating Supreme Court rulings have caused various reactions. Many insist upon explaining Roberts’ ruling as political genius. Some search for a silver lining in the ruling. Others focus on the upcoming election. All of these reactions reflect the first two stages of grief. Most Americans are still in denial or are attempting to bargain-away the shocking loss of freedom inflicted by those that were supposed to defend our freedom.

Some of us have already moved on to anger. Please join us. Anger is a gift.

Unlike people, freedom can be restored. No matter how much freedom is taken away, it can always be taken back. But it will not be given. Those that enslave do not give back freedom willingly. We must fight them for it. So, anger is a useful emotion when grieving for freedom. Anger will motivate us to act.

Stop denying our loss of freedom by imagining genius in Justice Roberts’ treasonous act. Killing constitutional principals in the name of short-term political payback is not genius. It’s an insult to every man or woman that ever died defending freedom.

Stop claiming that Roberts’ ruling is a victory because it created a limit on the commerce clause. The commerce clause is no more limited than it was before the ruling. Prior to Obamacare no one would have imagined that the commerce clause could possibly justify regulation of lack-of-commerce. Last week’s ruling simply confirmed what we already knew. But it left the commerce clause exactly where it has been since Wickard v. Filburn. In fact, the ruling explicitly acknowledged that the rule from Wickard is still the accepted commerce clause rule. This is the rule that got us to where we are today. Why is anyone celebrating this? The answer is: DENIAL.
Continue reading →

County Attorney Announces Citizen Prosecutor Academy

Posted on by

Flagstaff—Coconino County Attorney David Rozema is pleased to announce that his office will conduct a Citizen Prosecutor Academy on Friday, July 20 from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.

The academy will be taught by various experts from the County Attorneys Office as well as other professionals from the criminal justice system. Attendees will learn how criminal cases are handled from intake/grand jury through trial to appeal. They can also expect a lecture presented by the Medical Examiner and a presentation about the Department of Public Safety Crime Lab. Participants will gain a behind-the-scenes understanding of real-world prosecution and law enforcement.

“We’re excited to continue our academy which brings the community into the office to share information, exchange ideas, and facilitate a better understanding of how the County Attorney’s Office serves the public. It’s also a lot of fun”, said County Attorney Rozema.

Class size is limited, so interested persons are encouraged to apply as soon as possible. There is no cost for the academy.

Visit the website at www.coconino.az.gov/CountyAttorney to download an application form. Completed forms can be faxed to (928) 679-8201, or mailed to Coconino County Attorney’s Office, 110 E. Cherry Avenue, Flagstaff, AZ 86001 or contact Tami Suchowiejko at (928) 679-8229 or Email.

August 28th primary as important as the November election

Posted on by

ARIZONA—The primary elections to select those candidates for the November ballot will be held August 28th. Candidates include federal, State legislative and county offices. Although the primaries are to select individuals from the major parties, Independents and Non-Partisan voters may vote in the primaries on that day. The procedure is simple. Voters registered as Independent and Non-Partisan can go to the polls and request a ballot for either of the established parties. The exception is the Libertarian party which has chosen to hold a closed primary election.

Federal offices

As of this writing the Democrats have one candidate for the office of United States Senator to replace retiring Senator Jon Kyl. Richard Carmona of Tuscon is the Democratic candidate.

The Libertarians have Sheila Bilyeu of Flagstaff running for the vacancy.

The Republicans have five hopefuls. Representative Jeff Flake and Wil Cardon of Mesa received the most petition signatures and the choice of the Republicans will probably be one of those. The other choices include Bryan Hackbarth of Peoria, Clair Ban Steenwyk of Buckeye—both of whom are on the ballot having received requisite petition signatures. John Lyon of Glendale is registered as a write-in candidate so those voting for him can write his name in the appropriate slot on the ballot.

Senator Kyl will narrowly escapes a recall attempt by Leonard Clark of Phoenix who has filed recall petitions against Jan Brewer and Carl Seel.

For Representative for Congressional District 1 the Democrats will select between Wenona Benally Baldenegro of Flagstaff and former Representative Ann Kirkpatrick.

The Libertarians have Anthony Prowell of Tuscon on the ballot.

The Republicans will have a choice of Patrick Gatti of Show Low, Jonathan Paton from Oro Valley and Wade Douglas, a business man from Sedona. Gaither Martin survived a court challenge by Jonathan Paton and is still on the ballot.

State Offices

As of this writing, Arizona Legislative District 6 will choose between Democrat Tom Chabin of Flagstaff and Republican Chester Crandell from Heber, Arizona—the only two candidates for State Senator.

For Representative for District 6 the Democrats will choose Doug Ballard of Parks and Angela Lefevre of Sedona. The Republicans will place Brenda Barton and Bob Thorpe as their candidates.
Continue reading →