|
|
|
Lawyer enters not guilty plea for shooting suspect
U.S. Court News |
2012/05/01 10:09
|
A California man accused of committing the nation's deadliest school shooting rampage since the 2007 attack at Virginia Tech pleaded not guilty Monday to murder charges.
One L. Goh, 43, entered his plea through his lawyer, Deputy Public Defender David Klaus in Alameda County Superior Court.
Goh is charged with seven counts of murder and three counts of attempted murder in the April 2 attack at Oikos University in Oakland.
Klaus declined to comment after the hearing.
Goh also faces the special circumstance of committing multiple murders that makes him eligible for the death penalty.
Authorities said Goh planned the shootings and opened fire at the small Christian college founded to cater to Korean immigrants after becoming angry over a tuition dispute with school officials.
Those killed were students Doris Chibuko, 40; Judith Seymour, 53; Grace EunHea Kim, 23; Lydia Sim, 21; Bhutia Tshering, 38; Sonam Choedon, 33; and secretary Katleen Ping, 24.
Choedon's brother, Wangchen Nyima, attended Monday's hearing and said he wanted to see Goh in person.
"I just want to know why this happened," Nyima said. "He seems like he has his own problems. He seems like he's a psycho."
Shackled and wearing a red jumpsuit, Goh appeared somewhat calm during his brief court hearing and was noticeably thinner than he was during his previous court appearance.
A once heavyset man, Goh lost about 20 pounds in jail after he went on a self-imposed hunger strike, said sheriff's Sgt. J.D. Nelson. Goh inexplicably began eating again on Saturday, Nelson said. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court to decide if deportation ruling retroactive
Law Firm News |
2012/05/01 10:08
|
The Supreme Court will decide whether to apply retroactively its 2010 decision that immigrants have a right to be told that a guilty plea could lead to their deportation.
The high court on Monday agreed to hear an appeal from Roselva Chaidez, who was in the process of being deported when the court made that March 2010 decision.
Chaidez pleaded guilty to fraud in 2004 after falsely claiming to be a passenger in a car wreck. Authorities started deportation procedures while she was applying for U.S. citizenship in 2007.
Her lawyer never told her that her fraud conviction may lead to her deportation. Chaidez says she should be able to take advantage of the Supreme Court decision that cemented that principle. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
High court weighs overtime pay for drug sales reps
Legal News |
2012/04/17 11:01
|
A seemingly divided Supreme Court on Monday weighed a potentially costly challenge to the pharmaceutical industry's practice of not paying overtime to its sales representatives.
The justices questioned whether the federal law governing overtime pay should apply to the roughly 90,000 people who try to persuade doctors to prescribe certain drugs to their patients.
Many sales jobs are exempt from overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act. But unlike typical salespeople who often work on commission, pharmaceutical sales representatives cannot seal a deal with doctors. Federal law, in fact, forbids any binding agreement by a doctor to prescribe a specific drug.
Two salesmen who once worked for drug maker GlaxoSmithKline filed a class-action lawsuit claiming that they were not paid for the 10 to 20 hours they worked each week on average outside the normal business day. Their jobs required them to meet with doctors in their offices, but also to attend conventions, dinners, even golf outings.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was among several justices who wondered about limits on overtime opportunities if the court were to rule for the sales reps. A court filing by the industry said drug companies could be on the hook for billions of dollars in past overtime.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court: Rights don't have to be read to prisoners
Legal News |
2012/02/21 10:07
|
The Supreme Court said Tuesday investigators don't have to read Miranda rights to inmates during jailhouse interrogations about crimes unrelated to their current incarceration.
The high court, on a 6-3 vote, overturned a federal appeals court decision throwing out prison inmate Randall Lee Fields' conviction, saying Fields was not in custody as defined by Miranda and therefore did not have to have his rights read to him.
Imprisonment alone is not enough to create a custodial situation within the meaning of Miranda, Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the court's majority opinion.
Three justices, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor, dissented and said the court's decision would limit the rights of prisoners.
Today, for people already in prison, the court finds it adequate for the police to say: 'You are free to terminate this interrogation and return to your cell,' Ginsburg said in her dissent. Such a statement is no substitute for one ensuring that an individual is aware of his rights.
Miranda rights come from a 1966 decision that involved police questioning of Ernesto Miranda in a rape and kidnapping case in Phoenix. It required officers to tell suspects they have the right to remain silent and to have a lawyer represent them, even if they can't afford one.
Previous court rulings have required Miranda warnings before police interrogations for people who are in custody, which is defined as when a reasonable person would think he cannot end the questioning and leave. |
|
|
|
|
|
Legal Marketing News RSS
