raised it late in the arizona proceeding and the arizona commission did address it but the evidence in this raid in district court in arizona in the arizona proceeding it did as your dish will review yes and no additional evidence was


sorted out by the fact finder in the first instance but that being said i'm certainly not opposed to mediation as a first of all they're not mutually exclusive i think because scuse me if the mediation piece seems on


did not find that mr billow had the hired the power to hire and fire is because the district court considered the power to be an inference


forty two thousand dollars out of the two hundred fifty thousand dollars that he was asking for correct that is only partially correct but it just you never you know you fought the consulting agreement the whole way and so after


equitable analysis that calculus one of the very important things that the court considered was the fact that the day before the matter was set for trial the defendant abandoned the premises thereby moving the position


this is to ensure that your payments are made on time and to prevent the tax liens from occurring i'm not sure where is the implication here is that they're doing it themselves and not using a third party though the reason is because it they can't verify payment before the payments


bill would address a number of issues the bill resolved the hard dispute over one point two billion in funds for the pima has it met a gratian grant program am the bill resolve the dispute by requiring that funds be made available to the state of louisiana


i i'm hopeful that today we can reach to the very difficult and very emotional components of the gulf coast recovery rebuilding process process by crafting legislation that will facilitate progress and i think that


situation is that the fair use have been at every single level if you look prior to the storm after what the corps of engineers was doing


hasn't really been implemented well i support the section i'm concerned that without the proper guidance from congress funds will be misappropriated and the mission hazard mitigation grant program will be forgotten if there's one thing we learned


orleans what we know is that hud did have to step in and take over the management but we also know that there are those who are saying that it should be judicial management our review


creating a set of permanent belcher's as replacements and listening to the debate it occurred to begin with california myself that that was further than was appropriate for this limited purpose so what this amendment doesn't


this is all about and i have one goal with this bill and that is to see the gulf region rebuilt while addressing their pressing affordable housing needs in the region the hurricane to structurally three hundred thousand units of housing in the gulf region affordable


not have our program ripped off with fraud but this implementation is made very very difficult because some of these things were not well thought through and designing the program i was


district and conducting hearings but your constructive assistance and direction on on the recovery i want to point out to the gentle lady that if someone had a small business loan not related to katrina matters prior to the


foreclosures and in order to convey a property and receive insurance benefits f h a requires the property be and conveyance condition as in a more a style your book condition now i


of this and you know just to see this now i think that this is jumping ahead of the findings and i don't think that it is time i recognize myself five minutes gentlemen is correct that was originally what we talked about doing and this was


what i see as an oversight in the draft drafting of the bill the bill is careful to ensure that the survey questions are written in a way that are clear and not misleading but the bill directs the independent organizations connected to consult with the resident council about how to design a survey despite all that


friday open around the country a week from friday and june twenty ninth and i have been encouraging people to get behind h r six seven six and i believe that there is going to be a groundswell of support because you're right congressman


it'll open in new york this friday how many doing and and then and then will be in theaters across america june twenty ninth but i have to say that the that the premiere the screening that's most important to me


waiting for our children to return home their moms were waiting out there frantic worried about the children they were late home from school and i saw this cab pull up i saw this little lady step out of the cab and wander the streets and i was in


so in the interim before we get any kind of radical reform i think we need to address patient protection seriously and urgently in the first thing we could do is to eliminate the risk the loophole the other thing too i think and and listening to these stories again today


members of congress because we never had personal experiences related by members of congress before we now have a


actually accomplish the spreading out of section eight that would be supported by her but in terms of raising the amount


agreement to the extent so much of that has to do with accessibility to the overall menu subsidy available to a person and so one of the things that we've been focused on is trying


to talk about is portability mrs biggert will join me in saying to page county is a desirable place to live since two thousand and three we've had people poured into du page county with their vouchers from thirty eight other states and from thirty other housing


others claim that this is just another clandestine power grab by the administration these thoughts and concerns are not just being expressed by the so called liberal media or partisan hacks c r s for example says that the revisions made by executive order thirteen


regulations to protect the environment and promote the health and safety of the american people are disfavored let the market not the government do it now executive order one two eight six six is originally drafted was neutral it's process even though president


may be another case for public sentiment to kick in because most people of course haven't the vaguest idea that this has occurred newspaper reporters tend to describe stories about


they will now come to order and i'm pleased to welcome you today to this hearing before the subcommittee on crime terrorism the moment security on making community safer youth violence and gang interventions that work recent news reports cite


evaluation are invested in the evaluation of promising programs to bring them up to the level that they can be implemented on a wide scale with certainty this will not require any major


i'd like to begin by offering my sincere thanks to chairman scott into the committee as a whole for holding this hearing in allowing me to be a part of the individual lives the trajectory of families and communities in a very real way the success of the american experiment are at stake here for this


created to get brings together police probation officers prosecutors community based and social service providers and develop intervention strategies for use who are at high risk of committing crimes get has focused not just on reducing violent


for the involvement of local prosecutors and so i want to disabuse anyone of the idea that i or any of the other local prosecutors are only concerned with trying and imprisoning gang members to counter


the voters in virginia who received calls from a so called quote virginia elections commission informing them falsely that they were ineligible to vote or the voters who were told that they couldn't vote if they had family members who


authority can volunteers so our system is rife for problems rifle or misinformation that that is often given out as you well know mr chairman you know twenty one so called swing states with margin of victory that are so narrow that these sort of tactics


since my work with senator edward w brook republican from massachusetts and david gergen i've had from republican from minnesota i've had much experience from the congressional side looking at what justice has been


madam congresswoman i mentioned in my testimony the students at prayers you and i also know about students at florida a and m and i know of many other cases where students did particular problems in getting their absentee ballots even voting on campus saw even having the


chief culprit of the race is a path to maybe in the future the suppression of voters of all kinds elderly as well as students as well as others and as well as legal immigrants who may be categorized as


subcommittee thank you very much for holding this hearing today and sharing will be the fourth conducting in as many years on the important topic of piracy on college campuses and the bipartisan commitment of this subcommittee to address the issue of piracy where it


identify three immediate actions in the area of technology we formed a new technology group to work with commercial vendors in entertainment industry representatives to foster new technologies designed to meet campus needs and their networks in


testament of all the witnesses mr von i believe that gathering facts about current practices that colleges and universities are using to combat privacy is extremely useful would you commit to helping encourage colleges and universities to comply with


might be referring to the safe media's whoso product which came to our attention yesterday we've asked them to brief us on it and we would certainly want to bring them before this technology taskforce


kishen can play in the piracy both proactively and reactively students already know probably know that it's not legal to download a whole movie that's in the theaters but they're


years he was sworn in as the source and secretary of state for south and central asian affairs on february twenty first of two thousand and six of the course of his career


whether to reveal his or her number and the called party gets to make a choice about whether to accept an anonymous call transmitting information that misleads or deceives the cold party does not provide any additional privacy benefit overall


them and the violation of human rights no matter the intent no matter the basis there is no justification this legislation is built on distorted deliberate baseless and untrue attempts to portray a portion of america's not ours culture


see which ones of those merit going into the bill as we move it to full committee you know onto the floor of the house passed similar legislation at the end of last congress and i support it's favorable adoption today the gentleman's time has expired are there any amendments


is ordered reported favorably to the full committee there being no further business before the subcommittee the committee is now adjourned


objection all members of submit written statements for the record we are expecting floor vote around three at which time we'll probably have to take a short recess so i want to move as quickly as possible to our witness testimony and with that i now recognize


assistance to latin america to a total of one point six billion dollars last year one point six billion versus forty five billion which is more likely to spur sustainable development the reality is we are behind the


bring up the elements clause at that point the


having broadly attacked or challenge his sentence i don't think it was unexpected for the court to finish answering the underlying question there which is of course is


not only of saying that it wasn't following glover which was a binding precedent at the time but also that it did not rely on the elements clause at the time of sentencing at all but then it did rely on the elements clause three years


an ing this this court's broad holding in the houston vs mirage supermarkets case if this the initial case is the fact that the court did not apply the clear terms of rule and eight


standard within the medical necessity framework that was the holding in her case and she said in her decision which is document one seventy five that the


attributed to feldman's intent yes i think you have that same document again working off of customers who actually again the government narrowed the universe from its broader argument which i still think is a valid argument that for intended lost purposes


you know that determination then they could preserve it right well your honor they would have to show that there was exiting circumstances that babcock would delete the video and it would be not an issue that i just common sense that they get this is a


particular narrow place right no they don't but they don't have to bring over a chair incidents and they don't have to but they are tripped over ten of the twelve specifically referenced tripping over the legs of the chairs which is what occurred here now in


she was living with her boyfriend florists off weygand and he also provided prosecutors with her boyfriend's phone number he also in another e mail to prosecutors noted that he believed after speaking with her


april twelfth which was five days before trial nothing was done to search for her but even if you consider the efforts of the government five days before trial reaching out to her former attorney to get in touch with her they were


issue is you know how the government started this search a little earlier reached out to this attorney a little earlier there were a number of options available to them in order to secure her presence i have one other question related to what you've been talking about


something here there there there was all the circumstances around surrounding the boat the boat on which these migrants were found the testimony of


attempt to shift the blame that seems to me to be at best wholly inaccurate because all three lawyers work together to advance the blame shifting theory of the defense and each lawyer in his own way


replacement so that was kind of weird but let's just assume is that reference to hormone replacement your doc to rely on correct it's unclear that that record because they were booking records it's unclear and


explain to me why your opportunity to object was not sufficient in this case i understand the question to be the opportunity to object ms that ms grab it had the three day window of time not


dis records or court order that said here is what you've been required to pay if you would like to retain your your investment pay this amount you are going to release it to you ok and what was that that you remember what the deadline was to comply at that point in time twenty or thirty days it was


an he can at the conclusion of the case he can he can take a step to stay the ship you should for the amount he contends he's due and then at that at the when there's a final judgment then that can they'll be funds available for him but you're going to argue it's moot you're


lieutenant koski the ability to actually go ahead and you know search jurisdiction over the vessel and here i mean at the end of the day we can't just assume


pursue its claims or any alternate remedy available to the government including any administrative proceeding to determine a civil money proceeding i can including would indicate inclusive rights are not but my point is simply that it's evidence it's textual evidence that what congress


had in mind was a ministry of sort of proceeding based talking about a remedial percy yes let's let's let's ask a question this way let's say the government gets the property the property is


based on the cases a lot of the alternate remedy cases involve a relator and one key tim suit pointing to another key team suit that the government may or may not have intervened in and saying our stuff overlaps with that we came first we probably that's not an


a is an eighty year old statute the congress has amended at least once every decade over all those eighteen years and it's important to understand the meaning of any individual provision in the in that statute at the time it was an act of the original ordinary meaning at the time it was and


showing that he was qualified to do this job if he was on narcotics at the very time the determination is made maybe i've misunderstood something here


i think the first problem is clear well the only question is whether or not there is a debatable issue of fact of whether he in fact was disqualified or qualified to do the job well they perceived him of his able because he said he was disabled


appellee owns and operates a chain of hooters restaurants the basis of our complaint is that hooters website is not compatible with screen reader software and therefore discriminates against vision impaired disabled individuals


promised to do it to do it and september thirty twenty sixteen been a year and a half what did they say the problem was in that affidavit i don't recall the


case doesn't even mention the planned definition of medical necessity let alone try to apply it to the facts and circumstances of the case and that's a violation of the research regulations the research regulations specifically require benefit administrators


interim determination which says all right well you know this is a pretty serious offense this is you know driving under the influence and this is got a two thousand dollars bond and you can't pay that the maybe you can pay a thousand dollars and that's what we're going to put in a bond for i think


they are of course the appellant we are defending what the district court did and they need to bring a good reason for it to be vacated but in terms of what this court could say i don't see a reason why this court couldn't say the constitution does not this to be fair i was going to say the constitution


tells them when you've got a reason to hold them hold them do what you need to go do and let them go but if the concern is the jailers don't understand the sort of language i was articulating i think that made well be one of the reasons that the district court imposed twenty four hours and so that may be a


and that's something that isn't before the court today judge cohen declined to rule on that issue by judge cohen found and we agree we believe correctly that neither of these nurses as a matter of law were deliberately indifferent even under version of the facts are we take appellants


is entitled to pick a contractor and the county can't really say who the contractor should be can't really reject that contractor that's that is george none i'm sorry israel i want to say nine but i'm just i'm


again i'm treading on thin ice here because we're already off into the land of hypotheticals as you've well you're there because i've asked and i add and i appreciate that in some cases i've seen is maybe the best way to answer that question sometimes testimony is enough often the


counts where the phone calls to assure he and where lies were being told about the damage to the phones those counts were also presented to the jury and the defendant was convicted on those counts as well but what about the trash pool swear they


where the somebody was prosecuted under that statute for a false indorsement meaning that you know that they had authority to sign the document but they used for for an unauthorized they used the


say it didn't exist i wouldn't read the board's decision like i don't think that the board's decision it says he didn't address the convictions well he didn't address it in his motion to reopen or in this error in his affidavit


was the whole point of all these false documents because that's part of what the bank required was the documentation for the closing of the loans there you go but no bar or word knew there was anything


what is this how does that work we have no evidence either way about how the participation would operate except for the declarations that are in the record on that but under alabama law bypass


i would understand but in this case we're not relying on the i r s you do in part on the dollar amount where in part does it become a jury question based on the dollar amount based on the


and i will not have an hourly rate to post to you that was not my argument below what a miser the district judge supposed to do with your argument you won't give me a hourly rate so whenever there's money involved


that the facts played out i don't want to neglect to get to my other argument which i also present to you as reversible error and that consigns mcdonald versus united states the defendants requested and this


you that he knew you had some outstanding bills answer on the telephone calls but they're not here i haven't heard that he knew about my do you why he would ask how was it going he told me if i did the run


could be a hypothetical future matter so that's from mcdonald this is the language and you can and what he is doing what each of the four defendants are doing is they're wearing the uniform to exert pressure on a potential other


why you have to stretch this and i think it is a stretch you might be right and they rule in your favor but it's a stretch you've got the illegal underline that smuggling drugs into a prison


client to follow up on the patents at that point in time but didn't you have every incentive i mean you didn't you didn't know you were going to win at that point didn't you have every incentive to find and present all of the evidence you could on


hand to try to cover up the her husband's embezzlement or the conspiracy to commit money laundering that had occur you know completed a year before that


for what standard that would be clear you are because the issue is knowledge of foreseeability well it's so what's the best it i think you acknowledge that that's sort of an estimate right now how to weight


should have known of the extent of this seven year fraud that her husband perpetrated on the government that nobody knew about and argument is that the only reason that the judge was saying that was because she was the wife there was no other objective fact to show


to the point that he can't see foresman anymore but the whole job description and we have the government's expert here who doesn't mention even a word about the later distribution even though the defendant knew or should have known i think we all know


for failure to register and that case the case we're here on his second supervised release was sentenced in two thousand and twelve and in two thousand and twelve in the original sentence for this case the sex offender conditions were deemed necessary


to announcing the new iteration of the test the the the descending the four factors in descending order of importance and rolled and benefits received by virtue of enrollment or by virtue of eligibility for enrollment tribal affiliate


essentially the medical evidence that that you know he had treatment at the union health services in the fort mojave medical clinic and the undisputed evidence in this case is that every single benefit that he got was based upon his status of


regarding the continuation of trial and the attempt to stop and restart trial on day four by defense counsel what this boils down to i know the government wants to frame


is that his client had given him a totally different account of what the facts were doesn't he have a right if not an obligation to rely on what his client


the constructive amendment the issue here is somewhat different than the issue of whether the instructions themselves adequately covered the elements of the


enhancement during the time of the conspiracy before june of two thousand and six let me address that or answer that first by saying it's not the case that the conspiracy ends in june so that the language of the indictment specifically says


so the leadership could have been exerted in october and having found that the relevant conduct is there as a fair application to him and finally then i think to get to the third answer the question it isn't just one or two emails so we have all


remember this is one of those items that is admissible only against charles had and of course the district court reaffirmed that in the final instructions and that's what you heard two thirty we've addressed the question of lost the section of the transcript is


report if she says i have reanalyzed and reverified everything that the original authors did after she gave her first response in response to the government's questions the judge said something to the effect of well now i am worried


responding to areas that the defense raised first on the vouching area the defense brings up credibility they basically spend thirty


question that was asked by the prosecutor particularly beginning with the value chain was intentional it was intentional and when mr she could tell


statements they inform the jury about the existence of the system an agent longton not obtaining the evidence before it was lost they cross examine each and want to not once but twice he got sick in the middle of trial and had


court focuses on as your honor was saying the idea that the product was purely in trust state in that case the seventh circuit said well the hobbs act is only category three of the lopez morrison framework it's only affects on


whatsoever and the court also pointed out the issue that my client should have some awareness of what's coming in the court reversed their opinion and yet it was a second judge but in the middle of trial if it was day six always sudden he finds out that his ex wives are coming in and he doesn't have a


also in mitigation i see my time is up if i could just finish this one point also in mitigation the whole the throughout the entire trial the defense had been cross examining all of these officers about well did you get their


i'll say with mr smith i mean i would recommend that you move to the issue of the obstruction of justice that's the one that i think you have the best argument frankly but i don't know if my colleagues so you should use your time there you think but this does not seem


thank you your honor very briefly like to make two points first is the government points to the nevada robbery statute in the california robbery statute where the word injuries used to describe harms to property and that's true but the text this court has to interpret


of dearie ignoring the commands to to ensure that somebody isn't in fact shot and in the house manger in other words isn't it their responsibility to provide emergency aid to someone who may be injured well police do have a caretaking


attorney was acting not at the behest of her client but there are certain things that are not strategic there's certain things that the laws must be done by the person him or herself lawyer can


the career offender is higher than the two to one point one and they can't take advantage of it because they're saying look your career offender and you can't basically be excused from being a career defender through seventy two this is the odd case


correct and you know for the other reasons we've already indicated we believe that every man should be given to the district court so that way this issue about drug quantity and whether or not this record should rely upon


district court's allocation of burden of proof lead to a different result your honor it would a change in the in the allocation of proof we believe would lead to a different guidelines calculation the five point enhanced meant for aggravated assault would


identified mr martin as participating in those robberies or described anyone that matched his description what that left us with was the testimony of a cooperating witness this


involving i think that what they're using here pursuant to a government motion for substantial system is not an exclusionary term it's a term that opens the gate and once you meet that it sort of triggers ok


good morning honors in may please the court on my name is daniel hill and i represent by special appointment mr cooper in this matter just for the purposes of oral argument mr cooper wrote his own briefs right and if i may reserve about five minutes on rebuttal i watch


his confession there after came ok not on his courage but right over the sidewalk into a patrol car he's looking at the house and this is this is where this court has asked the question before what


they were they went inside to take pictures of her injuries because it was four o'clock in the morning there was no light outside but so there was nothing wrong with to the extent that there were some people that went in before the search warrant was obtained and then he made these statements before


yes he picked briggs right and briggs is out so there's no question briggs is gone once he asks for him to withdraw and there is a inquiry briggs's gone so the question is whether the court by appointing smith to continue


came on he did not ask to file a new sentencing memorandum he did not ask to file new substitute motions other than just to file the a new motion for a new trial which happened before


there on behalf of appellant you saw rodriguez i would like to reserve three minutes for a bottle and i'll watch my time there is a narrow question for this court to address in this case whether nevada battery with a deadly weapon is a crime of


on that is the garcia balance waylaid case it's that case presents the inverse of what's the situation in this case there the prosecutor in the u s attorney sought to dismiss all but the


from that historical background so the kansas law at issue there which was not even about drugs it was about paraphernalia of drugs that the government's reading of that just was sort of too far afield that the kansas statute


it was a minor so under the hypothetical judgment day that you have put out i mean i think that potentially could qualify but it's not your for a ten year mandatory minimum you know potentially so i i mean i don't


to use that federal definition of child pornography but then we're going to look at whether the state law stands in some relation bears upon or is associated with that that federal definition and that's the same standard that this court used in sullivan


to age and if you look at that opinion it also describes what's required three eleven point eleven and it does include that knowledge of age requirement so is there any example i guess someone being prosecuted under


been here for more than half my life is that your fourteen and i have my children here i have my wife you're my work i have a way to earn a living here i know how to earn a living here seems like the defendant is even indicating that he's worked here


information that was the information he had about what the defendant was doing with his time in mexico and in the correctional facility it was just in the it was that was all the information in the record he had was from the p s r he had a lot more details about what the defendant was doing in


want to give you this preliminary thought so you can shape your arguments around them so i'm having difficulty viewing that as a finding of fact by the judge we are he makes the statement that these are credible and logical and nothing he says subsequent to that none of his


counsel so i mean he had private counsel that's great argument but also could be made the other side of this which is he did never say anything about he never even thought about it ever pinsky's on the book while he


what the scheme is there's no question about what was charged no question about where they're going no question about what the argument was about why didn't that kind of cover your problem because the government also argues in closing for


dispute the state has instead argued that this case is like people the lynch in that case in lynch the defendant boarded a train in texas and then disembarked in chicago with two padlocked


possible too late by the comp case for us lay off have your surgery come back to work and then he was stuck in a precarious situation trying to prove a case back to actively that everything is completely consistent and believable along the


do he went back to report as well for a month it was just the sheer coincidence for a month it's very minor doesn't trouble him at all no big deal a couple days after his attacker all of a sudden it got worse no it was to generate that's why i kept seeing the doctor to the point where he couldn't function anymore and that's when he got


disused benjamin frets his cause of death was morphine and cocaine tice's city the the pathologist in france was unable to determine that the morphine was attributed to heroin so the cocaine may have been


their argument which result given all the same time for a life sentence because of his criminal history and seriousness and there's no way i guess you could do it that


into that the entry of the judgment the complaint in this case says that i turn in when stein erred in allowing entry of the judgment for or dissolution marriage that did not conform to the in court settlement made a few months


just blatantly she was meaning gassings she was just saying you will lose and you will get jail time the other one a bomb had to have happened if you went to trial guzman was were


it's going to be conducted and by that i mean it should go both ways in other words if an officer stops a vehicle smells and overwhelming odor of rock cannabis and certainly that's more indicative of drug trafficking and that circumstance the office


life of that fifth district the gardener of the village of gardener has turned over in excess of four point five million dollars the dispute over this last taxable year is nearly five hundred thousand


she tried to explain to the judge hypothetically i think is how she put it if she didn't want to reveal anything you know a witness might be testifying witnesses saying something about me being weird witness i don't know she was something i


sprocket lot was bad when it when i guess when they really a police officer felt that it was warranted and that was the program that they had at the bone terribly under twelve to maintain both the sidewalk and the parking lot that


we stick that it does not apply to a transfer from a relocation company to a buyer but again your honor i would submit that ultimately that mechanical reading of the statute essentially makes provision of the form a meaningless


law action because now they're on record they've said something in writing so it can be used in some other action under it rather than under the disclosure act the case law states that are proprieties that


juror he didn't want to say that the claimant would be employable between fifteen and thirty six dollars an hour because that could be quote somewhat misleading the only opinion he actually gave was the quarter between


nevertheless this case fits in a line of cases and the only law supporting the notion that because a defendant has a right to decide how to plead the trial court should admonish the defendant


at most to four years of prison even if the judge had arbitrarily decided to double you have to just say i don't know whatever you had last time i'm going to give you double that she still would have gotten lost on this case you know she could have gotten the morals she could have gotten was


history that says otherwise and therefore and that was the end of that and they proceeded to a hearing on the think of condition which is what the people state is before the court today so it's people can take our position that they that the state of the record


inadequate medical care and treatment now to me that right there are triggers the statute of limitations no consulate just finished referencing the beazley case and it's true there was a jury trial in


someone and so this court first district looked at it and said yes in fact there is a persona here is fiction required because if it's not in the court doesn't have that chance


looking for somebody trespassing


the statutory requirements for home confinement and see if if our case meets his meets those requirements and i think it does i would submit to you it does supervising authority in this particular instance we had the supervising authority was the court through the


charge is driving on licenses then what that means is we have to present evidence beyond a reasonable doubt the defendant was operating a motor vehicle on a public roadway and at the time that she was doing so she was suspended and the day that this trial we


to burn a copy to a cd he said speaking then as an end user so he was able to access the information after it was already recorded also english had no testimony at all about the recording process


far as with the original jurisdiction power such as common law fraud insurance fraud that that the commission would have the actual exclusive jurisdiction over those types of actions


the activity that would have a higher expectation of being met by this mother basically eating the court found she wasn't culpable or murder in that instance but then you add will ignore


one of the summer eight in one thousand nine hundred seventy and that one was three hundred fifty thousand dollars then there were two that were executed on the same day march twenty seventh one thousand nine hundred eighty eight one was for one hundred seventy three thousand and one was for twenty seven pounds and


the back room moment there was a description that he was sure the deal was seeing this in his being five foot seven inches tall i'm five and seven three quarters so i like to think that that is not short but it hardly it hardly sets


has the practical effect of saying to the defended as a disclosures did state that this doctor we anticipate that this doctor is going to testify to the information contained in the medical record it's no one you defended to go in subpoena those records and see what's there the defendant did with the van


aunt who may or may not be or have been a witness file a false one or maybe a grand jury secrecy rules are violent of course no one ever suggested that it was but who knows anything's possible the theory seems to be hand


left the scene because mere presence at the scene of the shooting coupled with the flight from the scene shooting is not enough to prove accountability you have to prove that the defendant either intended to aid or abet the commission of


intent of that parties in referencing that oral agreement is quite plain i'm especially if we take into consideration the language entered in the first judgment for dissolution of marriage which was entered in one thousand nine hundred one and then shortly vacated there after that in that judgments there was an


consideration present tense and their dissolution of marriage and a company moral agreement that both parties wanted to be fair and take into consideration the cashflow of each party in the years the you i mean writers equitable estoppel


retirement has no effect whatsoever on the wife's ability to claim an interest in the husband's retirement benefits when asked why she waited until april of two thousand and twelve to initially bring her claim the wife stated because he was supposed to have notified me for one


additional points that that go to curtis is capacity to make a legal decision for himself are these there was no ongoing relationship between curtis


the property tax affection procedure only ok but then let's put this all in the big picture context down springfield when they came up with this legislation what they're really saying this is a specialized area ok we've got i mean the property


i don't believe he did because he said that he has he definitely has a major he's an he's an angry man he may have said i'm cross that the anger is causally related but he clarified that to say that the petitioner picks and


why waste the the expense of defending any aspect of it right right i mean the gross verdict


i want to emphasize again you know the procedural posture of this matter when the trial court granted the voluntary dismissal and denied leave to file i think those rooms were premature


by the door he didn't even remember her saying that she felt so there is no statement through mr don't we even if his his recollection his recounting as we're admissible under some


context to make it very clear that the prosecutor was in fact referencing the defendant he starts out saying clearly what happened that morning was because mr sethi decided to take this to a different level because the defendant decided he didn't want to deal with these


and the reason we point that out is well i mean the argument would be well maybe he didn't know you should feel but there is no evidence of intoxication now gates is allowed to leave the scene and there's


teach the evidence that they would have a reasonable doubt the fantasy of gates has consistently testified i don't know shopping that's the best been from day one so you can


wasn't even filed as a two fourteen on one of those files a motion to beg and the motions of a day did not have a single affidavit a single set of evidence attached to it that addressed anything other then the single


and which was implemented or incorporated into the order so rather than looking there's cases and they've all been cited the cases in our opinion stand for the fact that just because


on for the one hundred dollars for the five hundred dollars round and that's confusing too because it does in the one section it's just says that he's the truck corporate trust trustee is entitle the


fully agree with the court's analysis with respect to the multiple contribution which we do think however that it was an error when it determined when it ruled that the highest contribution right did not include


principle that the statutory sentencing range is the best objective evidence of the legislature's judgment as to the severity of an offense well mr habib my concern with your argument is that johnson's discussion is in


extent and what i'm what i'm suggesting your honor is that although johnson address the eligibility stage of the inquiry but underlying point is that a guideline stipulation is not the same as trial proof and when a guideline stipulation is treated as


plea argue that the planet deserves to be fired now prior to that there was no way to justify the plaintiffs germination unless you just want to come in and say you're fired and that doesn't really work in the workplace you normally have some just occasionally you can rely on it may not


enough to meet the burden of material that's the one category of evidence they did explicitly say they were considering right seemingly considered in providing an analysis of two different things we're not


based upon a change in personal circumstances should not be allowed and i'm not sure that it's entirely clear the board is decision didn't make a finding saying that this


think paragraph forty three judge there are there is no doubt that they referred to those things but i always and i'm sorry and emotional and physical trauma on paragraph thirty six yeah


as was done in the every health care so very health care i think illustrates a point i think it goes to also the whitman case when there is a narrow and not of gap filling you know words for the protection of


is undisputed that the plaintiff selected and purchased their distributorships or routes with substantial investment and with the understanding that they would be running them as independent businesses they entered into distribution agreements with being bought with the intent to maintain


in the meantime i'm grateful for your patience as we connect with each other virtually a couple words about technical issues if for some reason your connection fails orde there is some technical glitch please don't panic


time but we do have some technical issues from time to time so certainly we won't hold that against you and if we fall off we hope you don't hold that against us the way we


unequivocal if it requires implication or subtlety there is no agreement to arbitrate and the new york court of appeals is equally clear that a handbook with that a disclaimer


i'm not arguing that i apologize what i'm arguing is that mr lowenthal was prohibited from taking an adverse action in response to the july th e mail it matters not to mr know continued


those three categories are not this was all other act evidence this was for or be evidence that was was admitted and none of these acts which connect to mr cooney are connected to the victims in this case the


filed and so we think that the record does support the determination that these findings are made for the purposes of the left with respect


he this this was a lot of money but in terms of discovery it did not disclose the details they showed and i feel very bad that we could have avoided all of this issue just stepped up to the plate or elated


judgment enforcement actions are not subject to those territorial limitations and they actually cite the national union case which was a pre attachment case so respectfully the ontario case that was just recently submitted to


passing would there be an objection from the government to remain and to let the agency decide the question of the interplay between the doing and one thousand and three point two way absolutely or are there would be an objection to that we


are to the domestic violence charges and she makes references to being concerned mr lockett is going to harm other people submit that can't be reverenced i think frankly other than the domestic violence charge and more specifically she says


cannot be the case for example if there is what did your policy here indorse over paragraph one v two if i understand your question correctly judging paragraph one


that provides less protection for the title company than to list a specific right but if six includes an entire instrument another hit well sir because what you did was you followed the tradition of the custom and practice


that i am doing so emma leading the st amendment that is if without meaning to turn off a microphone and you are not able to speak


argued counsel i will acknowledge in in fact if you go through the closing argument you read the first part and counsel's first words of the jury are in fact if i can just read to the court from the appendix page nine


talked about in the first litigation i think yes your honor that if there are improvements to be made it five in a fraction will continue to do that just as it has done through this litigation and just as it has gotten to where it is now i can tell


has a legal system in place to protect children from domestic law the question is are they making efforts to actually protect this child from the effects of the met violence and it's clear when they give custody every custody to an abusive father that they are not actually


factual issues which you discussed at length in your briefing perhaps the next citation i was going to give you will help on that when teluk him sued itself for breach of the written contract


mainline factor he did not say i don't care that it's x x post facto i'm giving you a thirty year mandatory sentence oh he did not do that he looked at the amendment changes and he


be a factual question here as to whether or not the pump that was there would have been wouldn't it given this type of electrical shock the owner i think you could check the record i don't think there's any evidence in the record that that pump that was there was ground the before we got there we


that soldiers were housed in these hard hard stand buildings the did not have grounding and that fact was known to them was because we were in a combat zone where the risk of of of harm from the fire was greater than the risk of putting them


no the tailor court said no the slate case says no you can't just isolate the the every case can boil down to did somebody do one thing wrong you can't even state tort law doesn't allow you to me ask you this


section is it necessary to get a direct connection with actual hostilities our view of this case is that the facts of record very clearly established that what we were doing was keeping this base running so that all these military men could go out and


of extended designation namely you had a tropical depression sixteen other natural disasters in one thousand and two thousand i'm politically crisis which exacerbated the effects of the global economic worsen all of which led


six he says no i guess it wasn't totally resolved one thousand nine hundred nine was the last murder he left the country six years later and didn't claim that any thing happened to him in


front doesn't it make a difference in terms of progress of the dynamics of a class action as to whether your potential classes ten thousand or ten


to try to get into the the fact in terms of inquiry as to whether or not the drop is connected to the problem of statements is an inquiry that should not be done at the class certification stage it should wait until


to look at it he didn't find that there's was causation as the people before may twenty or august thirteenth he didn't find make any findings with respect to loss causation and our position as i as i mentioned in my in my primary argument is that last causation


follow the recipe that congress set forth in the internal revenue code and that there is no matter what one of these alternatives you look at the trust has to be structured in a specific what if it's not there's no deduction


your only argument with reference to those events is that he wasn't allowed to stand exactly where he wanted no your honor i respectfully disagree that's not our only argument our argument is is that mr maher


morning morning mate place the court i'm jane yesterday and i represent the city and the individual defendants i'd like to pick up on the judge various points if i may the theme of mr harvey's argument


and he decided to reject it he took his lawyers advice rejected it i guess to ask it another way would would you be standing there arguing silos in effect with boyd had gotten the one and a half year sentence after the open plea no


to find out what actually happened because your honor there wasn't any claim raised in state court or even now as i understand it that the open plea was not knowing involuntary which i think is a major


cases because there was no dispute they were analyzing the wisdom of the five exercise a loose lanes and they said they've got to preserve assets for the plan they can't waste plan they have to recognize that if they gave


a very unique and discrete piece of evidence and the judge instructed the jury that it's not just the stone number it's this the way he did a distinctive method i believe is the term the judge used in his truck in the jury and it isn't


probation or supervised release you can't impose a condition and that's really what this is impose a condition of hunk of time but you can only do it if you judge believe that you really think this person needs to


three and the four together now under ether eight a court can impose a term of imprisonment only upon finding a violation of supervised release by preponderance of the evidence and under thirty four a


decide whether they wanted to have julie gilbert from illinois and her boyfriend in his family illinois home and stay at their air b n b and that means that the it's completely different than the big cases but in your argument


our position before we even know whether she has been filed against you which is exactly contrary to illinois law the law says a duty to defend is determined where we have a complaint that's


not and you know the car was under the officers control there was no no no one was free to take the car at that point but there are different in the work custody of the th amendment in the th amendment


work exceeded their the bounds of their inquiry was looking into the factual allegations of the successor interest claim in the court in utah in trying to make some determination as to whether it


with his guns in his hands private another possibility is that partner was affecting a valid rest of the man who ran into the house there's no reason to think on this record that smith was you know just running


you don't comply with these conditions then there will be that the coverage is excluded like wait a minute where does it say that the other conditions it clearly says if it indeed the language immediately follows that other where


that is a matter of public record the thing that he made up i don't believe he made it up i believe the testimony of the record indicated that he didn't wasn't familiar with and just added something to it what the what the record indicated was that he pulled the


police officer never said he was a police officer how does that translate into him being on duty by him exercising what police officer should do by breaking up altercation you know peace between his


recorded into the chart your honor and so i guess however despite that the focus should have been limited to the nursing staff who folk who cared for this asian and not all staff


who was not making an order that he should have made and you know of course there's more and i'm not going to go through every point that we've raised in our brief but i do think it's important that the court know that the


the geriatrics expert and frankly i don't think this is this is fair the way this played out just to clear oaks and and frankly not fair to the trial court the plaintiffs persuaded the court during extension of extensive hearing and motions


letter based and frankly based on misconceptions of the law very near narrow view of relevance and in this the issue came up repeatedly that if a finger is pointed at another cause there must be


handling of civil rights cases in the federal court system and that he always emphasizes with his the people who report to him the importance of could keep of keeping contemporaneous time records irrespective of whether there's a contingency


may sell or sign transfer otherwise dispose of any part of the beneficial interest under this trust in me use and consume the proceeds thereof and they may also amend alter or revoke from time to time


the key thing here is what did the land trust say how do you interpret the land trust at the time william exercised his power of direction and then if that doesn't


ramifications of this case and i have that heated this case and i welcome the opportunity to convince the court why jails the parks was incorrectly cited and although we have some spectators this morning my only regret is that i couldn't invite my


finding that was not made the commission you can assume i suppose that the commission made a finding one way or another but as i've already said you can


supposed to prove if he has an privacy interest he's supposed to prove that the area searched he has a privacy interest in it and he never did that in this case so ultimately the


extremely broad ban that infringes on constitutionally protected liberties and in here also we don't have me now to ensure here because we know the details we know that a man has mandatory school ordered as part of the


of fraud if writers don't agree with me about that i want to make sure at least briefly address the public disclosure issue here so that the point of the public disclosure bar is now we think we understand the point that but the point is there was a disclosure


defendants and when asked what it was give examples of what the shots were that were taken by writers and other defendants that they couldn't do the business and if they gave us the business we would fail it was done with both suppliers


recklessness lack of place ensure that type of thing judge so i think it's a broader us kid cory put it would you agree you have to show more than negligence by the pilot right you have to show that the pilot did something that was


the opposite of the case i have a good analogy for you wouldn't regard you frequently sit in judgement of lower level trial court judges they make mistakes sometimes you say they made a


soft and gun in his mouth slapped around both with open hands elbows ok so while he was suppose we handcuffed in a part of europe to push by the way had no rings well he's


place for purposes of triggering coverage under the insurance policy and i think the answer that question to touch upon something that justice mason was was and some of your questions was what is it about a prosecution that makes


say minimum two years every insurance company in the state's going to say are not policy period we don't know right so you get a premium for it right but you never have to pay out well no not not a i mean if you're the insurer on the risk when the


issue and that's the third reason why the claims downward and that's a capable of repetition evading review policy exception although i don't know that you even need to address that because the board would have to establish that the claims are moot to start and i don't think they can do that so let me briefly


whether or not the policy is valid or not this can be done in the future but in addition there they are entitled to their fees well if the court said this is not this is not something that


company of these blog posts and media appearances he didn't do that frequently and the and the ramifications of that sorry just one last point on that are that that could create a significant problem for swine did it here it doesn't appear so from the record because there


three hours and seven minutes to finally find out what was going on so again we respectfully would ask the court to reverse as to the relief that we're seeking i was a reversal in the nurse's actions her her conduct here was


responsible for taxes and was he the treasurer do i have that right i don't think so i think i think i assume that mr gleason alysa treasurer because he was the one who originally set out


all of your employment


i want to make one thing


the difference between murphy hilton and allen is the difference between an identified cause of a fall with an inference as to what caused the condition in france as to what cost the call cost the


first purchased insurance or do you not know you know i actually do not know the answer to that question you're on i'm not certain but the it


we do believe but they are harmonize the bible amongst one another that the fruit itself and the special in right into a answer because at that time line that we're looking at where she's acting as their employee and


white these pictures but if you want us to look at color photographs you have to provide them ok and let's let's be fair we think that there are that a rule has been proposed here that if there are color pictures produced in


again i don't understand how your position in this case doesn't make a general contractor the insurer strict liability for anything that happens on the job site it's not strict liability because there's


patterson for the plaintiffs appellants unless the nd amendment is a nd class right cook county stacks on firearms and ammunition must be shot down just because the supreme courts of illinois in the united


in the road map case which involves jehovah's witnesses growing for an evangelizer in the city trying to put a tax on them in order to be able to do that there was no evidence in the record but any single person had been dissuaded from


treatments there are three pieces of critical interrelated evidence that was excluded by the tribal trial courts in the first that are defendant depended factor to neo this test test that decision that


rudd should have been able to introduce evidence of the affair investigation itself but in this case not only was he not allowed to do that he was not allowed to impeach foster here but it's with prior inconsistent


situations where we talk about it like and and counsel us indicated that they have some evidence that that that those of us those three of us happen in their words frequently but it's not frequently enough to say once a day once a


provide a tax attorney he did his person twenty eight percent and all they did is captivate what should have been paid over that period didn't ask for twenty nine percent she didn't ask for twenty seven percent he didn't come in and said i say i should only be paying


seventeen we shall shaper was suspended without pay in july two thousand and seven and those days are very important because the st taylor decision from this word came down in september two thousand and


issue about substantial fines in regard to the comment about the clerk's office that's what the affidavit is for you don't have to say well maybe the clerk made a mistake or something like that i can remember


was a personal jurisdiction case in hospital what that case involved was the services by a michigan pathologist who did a tissue asked say of an illinois resident and the illinois


what a tendency interest was a tendency to hearken back to the bar exam because nobody practiced property law could be a leasehold the state a mere occupancy


on testimony on cross examination she admitted that she put facts in there that she knew to be untrue and so yes the trial court was very right in taking into consideration the credibility of her as a witness


evidence began really to focus on the training nobody knew what to do the people involved say we didn't know what to do and also on the rescue itself the what the would call be chaotic occurrence of


they have out there on that day based on the number of swimmers right that's correct


testified that she was attacked by all five people that this was a gang rape she never testified it was an individual one on one they found that mr pendleton was guilty but it was not a gang rape they found him not guilty of the instruction that says he


jurisprudence in illinois supreme court right now he cannot based solely on the law that we have based on evidence and based on brown bring this to mr pendleton's argument today that this was caused because he


detailed explanation or discuss the significance or impact you need to provide the essential elements so i think that is that's where we should see


individual's youth their immaturity and potential for rehabilitation all through the lens of the fact that they were a child and children are different the the question that the supreme court has eventual sort of framed to


really incorporated this u s supreme court precedent into the illinois statue and if someone under the age of eighteen when they're sentenced they have to be considered their age has to be considered their impetuousness level of maturity


it's true and also he says the trial court needs to determine if his crime reflected transit immaturity which is another fact that has to be considered if that is true or if he is the rare child whose crimes reflect irreparable corruption again that's another


is clear in illinois law for the people the williams opinion citing people be billions from the only supreme court to defend it isn't title to have the jury receive instructions on the law that applies to his theory of the case provided there is evidence in the record to support that theory


realistic it is not possible to cabin the kind of challenges you're describing to regulations and in fact plaintiffs don't attempt they say any kind of pattern or practice of behavior or any kind of policy we should be able to


think i think everybody involved in this case the judge the lawyers were looking to be injuries there was a great amount of deaths was placed by they brought in the doctors


my name is john space i represent the next session pipeline company and i have represented on accession pipeline company since about two years ago when these complaints were filed shortly after the commission issued its certificate and for two years


opinions four hundred fifty thousand dollars of damages for three point six acres of a permanent easement that goes across farm a four hundred fifty thousand dollars and it's not until six months later


i just don't know the answer that that's right i'm trying to wonder about i hope everybody gets their point of the objection here should have been something like if they want to get here say fine it's their private to object the way they want you but frankly what is


and affirmative defense dr cardwell also cannot show that any reliance on receiving a second directorship agreement was reasonable dr carville's contention is that when entering into the assistance agreement he


properly found that dr cardwell did ratify the assistance agreement it's in just a few the doctor cargo received a benefit from executing the assistance contract he accepted the benefit of a four hundred fifty thousand dollars loan he also


back in front of the judge may for eight months later the order to get his ruling three hour damaged


i don't know what all of us number three the president earning capacity of the court did the courts that went in in its order on the motion to reconsider the court went to great length to address all of


but the arrest for violating the saki no contact order and specifically he wouldn't admit initially that he was arrested when he was asked very specifically rearrested for bylines or paycheck protection correct his answer was that doesn't mean i did it he wouldn't even in


a true examination of the of the photographs that the trial court had to to waive all that evidence and i think it's important to note that these photographs were were supposing examined by garrett discovery to show that the sport the response claimed that these


came up was in the middle of trial knowing that my client has trouble understanding these things and there's no disputing the record that he did not explain that he did not explain why he was telling my client have to testify my client specifically said that he was trying to tell his attorney


references he beat her ass language by basically rotten saying that this was a directive given by the defendant's husband and that she ultimately acted upon this directive when she committed this offense


josh's text message by rejecting the plain language of that text the prosecutor then in rebuttal commented as he was allowed to do based on the defense counsel opening the door he did then commented further on the


text message however this was clearly allowed based on the defense counsel opening the door to this very subject he was not arguing the truth of the text message he was commenting on his counsel's argument doesn't he


the chair these are all these are all things that you now claim happened the point being that masterson's not making these poor self defense claim until the point of trial or was it that he


adamant about that if you recall she said that was not a draft we have to do that we send that over to the human nursing home because they want that information when that patient comes through the door that you think they want that of that they can get the meds in advance so it wasn't a draft or


before this issue came up before the the alleged relationship started she had been invited invited to a birthday party of his along with a group of other people and they all brought small gifts the only other give the she got was a get


clerk's fee of thirty seven fifty a day for periodic imprisonment that in fact it was to be given directly to his wife for the support of the family this is a little different than article thirteen because an article thirteen the


doing that here defendant is able to go to work he has a two hour grace period before he goes to work and after he goes to work because he works construction at that various locations he was required to give the sheriff a schedule you know where he's going to


and so the question becomes why did the court feel that the sixty five your son's twenty years above the minimum was the right size for mr maggio well counsel relook at the court's comments don't you think that


not ever witnesses yes so i believe that under the circumstances court made a serious error by our use reports into evidence


another very much but the bottom line is people were still doing well under those circumstances and based on the other ones which made i believe that it was error or


that the period of time between the time that the order was entered and the one year period and the one year term after the expiration of the period of redemption then allow for the recording of the deed during that period of time


his money was down to a million so a million seventy two thousand because of the fact that he spent money defending himself in the federal court system which is his election her money she didn't touch it went to three million


and whether again this is a discovery violation origin of use of process for allowing now process it's got to be stopped this is the place to do it this is the case for it i don't like coming here as much as it is you don't like having more


records in the house there were other copies made that the mailing and other ways to document the process of ben had been followed rather than testimony four or five years later basically say this is the way we mail things and this is the


but had nothing to do with this claim here's the reasons why but what if this claim is true he gets no recourse because you can say i'm a university and i do stuff where i'm not


ultimately what the court decided it was a gentleman was on crutches he's trying to get he tried to traverse a wet floor in the bath and he went back and the court held that this was not in the court said


dispositive there's been no argument made in any of the briefing at any level that i recall about form selection clauses and i'm not aware of any and the contracts of the contact the idea that having a


said the show that he didn't make any payments and the real question should be to the straw is why do you think you should become the sole this property when you failed to make the


given to necessary parties the oldster in case also decides whether the necessary party yes a necessary party is one of participation is required to


facts existed and so if the defendant acknowledged at the time of sentencing that i've known all along ok i was sure does that when he said no but the record went on the facts of this record do you have


nature of the charges and i'm still struggling with other than what i would call conjecture i'm not seen any evidence where the defendant admitted that he understood this i know we've got


was available according to him when he was a us customs and it must have been used although we don't know because i don't have the court order i don't have the affidavit as to what was submitted to to get that court order so struggling in the dark and i never received the materials


counsel you know argued it and so it's you know i think you know i mean i sat and sentenced a lot of people and it doesn't mean that you didn't that you didn't hear it because you don't construe it in the same light that the


correct the what precisely he found that some of the statements that have been made were proper questions subject to a terry stop at the stop was not pretextual even though this year gomez argued that there was substantial evidence that it was the finding was that


he went too far inside and should if overboard and in should have said well it suggests to me sort of offering a formal opinion that i believe this happened he's still not testifying to mental state just because this person was an experienced


second two thousand and three he had the predisposition on that date so i think the defendant is one to say that when he offered the opinion that the person had experience that unequivocally without question establish that the expert was


the request was made for the roster but the request was not made until after the usual time for destruction and it had been destroyed and there was no tip to the prison or i should say tip there was no request from the defense to


know how he brought alcohol into the prison so we don't really have facts to say that that was an act of dishonesty and in fact the district court made the finding that none of the misdemeanors went to the issue of dishonesty and line with


on appeal that the supreme court said i shouldn't so if we take this is plane air let's assume we have to take it as plane air and you argue persuasively that it might be an error but by having to construe so many things why is that plane error well i think it's plain i guess


boxes and he is right there at the trunk with them whether that physically touch the boxes about these open the boxes to look at them the experts testimony was in general all we don't see people who are not who don't know what's


and apart from what she knows the money is being spent for on family things so you can understand a differentiation in verdict now what i hear you saying is that wealthy juries irrational here they are going to be irrational every place you can't


to those people does not constitute an agent for the point he's an independent got if you were an independent contractor he wouldn't meet the standard the reality is we don't know the answers to any of those because they don't appear in the facts that are part of the


false statement was made by a seller of property to a third party that third party then acted upon it and bought this property then the property was then resold to the for the park service national park service


when taking into account that factor would presumably control it with the mandate of thirty five fifty three eight secs number one that's just more in that and a logical top when you say wait things don't him this has way


mexico well the evidence is that the mother came and said yes he was registered in mexico she offer an explanation but nonetheless there's no real dispute about that and in the broader scheme just leaving aside the document there's other evidence in the record


run i think it's irrelevant to the district court's finding as to whether chevrons attorney's fees were a direct result of the crime charge the crime to which mr lots pled guilty included lying to shove ron's attorneys and the district


to the testimony didn't relate to the subject matter of the trial for that reason the district court stated the report should be turned over after the lunch break had gone at that point where the government had turned over the report the government's case was


report believes was not truthful testimony and the district court was not speaking of the statement regarding knowledge as the district court was and manifest instead the district court was discussing it that he didn't believe


with judge sautner took the bench we advise the judge your honor the parties have reached an agreement as to how to proceed with the notes about the non celebrity jerk and that agreement was to remove them


was say why ninety six instead of ninety two or something even lower which gets me to the second so here's a question i have for you on that though is it realistic for us to expect


he should get two points for safety bell the judge asked please come back the next day everyone came back the next day including was the odd one who was on bail and then anaheim police detective showed up and said that he had gotten information from


fact in the government's brief one of the argues the government makes is that because they were spanish speakers they they couldn't protect themselves from the defendants and i find that are in a very interesting because the defendants were spanish speakers


more than ten thousand dollars in currency and then there are some subclauses after that and these go on for a few lines and then there's a comma and that's and then says and transports the currency when you break down the statute into its component elements


packer's and couriers obviously that's not the situation here i'm troubled by his suggestion that the statute is properly read to encompass what he refers to as an ultimate concealment i don't find


had a chance to to address that i have addressed it in the brief that's the courts reviewed it but clearly the evidence we are complaining about is evidence that twenty five to seventy five percent supposedly of these patients were ambulatory just because


new identity while in taiwan and only travels using that new identity it frankly is remarkable that she was found at all because she was traveling with that new identity the totality of this case indicates that one hundred eight month sentence was reasonable


crime and get the conviction hung up of knowledge is that he knows how a drug deals is conducted he knows that the source states far from the broker and the broker sells the drugs while the source rove is around and


know that from the united states versus polis a recent court decision by this by this court that the jury is required to decide the issue of statelessness and that must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt unanimously according to the six men and amendment of the


system how could you possibly you could make that argument that the problem is with our cabin got what twenty to fifty four d ones which is the supreme court most to determine that not me that argument and the chances of me getting


gave me was a quotation just the inclusion of the word ordinarily suggests that there's not an absolute rule that once you're out of jail you can you can forget about anything else because you're home free i mean it would seem to me that the notion of


sentence so that's actually a fairly precise question to which you have to answer yes or no i'm having trouble understanding how the you'll instruction which i think was an error


procedure and that doesn't say that the court cannot adopt or incorporate by reference i just can't say as they are not going to think about it this is this portion of am lying your honor i was discussing rule thirty two and whether the judge it


that the material witness was there and said that she had gone down to mexico with her girlfriend or a friend of hers to go dancing and after repeatedly she was told you're lying we don't believe you at that point she confessed and


progeny but even in the more fact intensive context of deciding whether a defendant was truthful in a safety valve debrief this circuit has recognized post poker that's an appropriate area of judicial fact finding


as the pre sentence report indicates mr foley has appeared in martinez was arrested on september fifth two thousand and four he's been in custody this entire time so september first two thousand and six he had already served a two year maximum


that decision actually and it occurred to me in reading that case that what we're talking about the lesser included instruction is a violation of federal rule of criminal procedure thirty one it's a statutory violation the supreme court in keevil actually noted that there was not a due process


which the court found a valid and thereby expanded their reach of the jury verdict by including in the object the


problem with the guidelines as a result of their remedy of making them advisory so rejected this idea that a jury asked to determine beyond a reasonable doubt any factor that increases defendants sentence up to the statutory maximum so again this is cases consistent with the


into the united states only then could she be convicted and i think on this record there isn't sufficient evidence to support that conclusion let's say a person and this doesn't relate to this record but i'm trying to understand the right rule or what it should be


to smuggle the aliens in make a lot of money that there is no question in this case that the defendant would have even abetted the brain too and the transportation it would actually defeat the


marijuana there so it isn't that she had previously said i don't know something i don't i that was in marijuana that's not true so how does that in any respect demonstrate that she knew there was marijuana in the facts other than because she has a


kind of inconsistent vacillating statements about ownership of the cars he crosses the border we have the fact he's constantly shifting stories we have the fact that even on cross examination when pressed as to the timing of the


identity theft or that this that the that this challenge evidence constituted evidence of a very better very broad level of identity theft and that presenting that writing someone


the reference to the parent child hierarchy in this case factually the children were sixteen and seventeen years old very near the age of majority and by the defendant's own testimony this is that excerpt one twenty eight the children had a key to the


only you can do that i can ask the doctor questions like that all day and even get speculation with the commission just wants it together i'm still in the same spot him today that has come from thinking


rehabilitated and then can therefore help mr hammond's through his process of rehabilitation


benefits protected by the constitution would require us to construe article thirteen section five in a way that does not fit in a way that the plain language of the provision does not support we may not rewrite the present protection clause to include


determined that for the forty six pages of reasoning that judge jones laid out he didn't abuse his discretion he waived this issue properly he looked at the prejudicial value of the statement he waited against the tactics that the


to leave you in property i think that maybe that's kind of a weak description of the relationship that was testified


right then he stopped being mother daughter of grandmother and we'll call it c and we're looking at here is the intent of the grandmother and the grandfather actually well yeah but if you look at well do we really care what the


exactly right and that's what he or she has a question for you mention the cost case and i was looking at that case and obviously comparing it to the facts of this case and there's a distinction that i noticed and i want to get your thoughts on that in the cross case


left open the ability of betty to actually take descendants if she simply it that i think realistically that betty assuming evelyn would have anticipated


issues you're going to have issues where you that the child necessarily doesn't ever want this to happen again and it is protective and offensive and and so forth i did not see anything about this


i don't think why this court should look at the videotape because that was part of the evidence but without what i'm what i'm trying to say is that it does not have to be an equal amount of evidence on both sides for it to be a credibility contest one other question


there the witness was already being impeached by the zero nine i believe domestic battery and also that she was had a warrant out for us on the evening of the occurrence and the jury was aware of these facts and as justice


identify a single person who didn't come to them because a formal letter now that may be and mr mr beeman yanks two sentences out but he carefully does not go through the


etc but the bottom line is we have undisputed facts sworn testimony from the director of technology and director of security director of security lost faith in this around he recommended to carry ruby to larson the assistant superintendent he needs


your honor i'm not i think we have to look at the entire trial cumulatively and not only look at that one instance because on its face the state's question is innocent what happened next but the state should have known where the


childhood and those comments word choice are not unusual for somebody who believes in a literal interpretation of the bible because those types of the names are in the bible and now


don't apply anymore once we get to the one we're talking about and so i'm not going to talk about them sworn out a document that counts is that commission denial and here burdened by common sense how states several facts that can't be


is those instructions are designed to form a prior fact in the current state of the law i've never seen nor do i know of any provision in the statute that calls for i p o s to be used in worker's compensation case obviously trying


intentional relinquishment of a known right and that is precisely what we have here he knew of the right for the ability to potentially waive an entrapment defense knowingly forgoes that and pursuit of what was a police strategy


of policies that the director for the secretary of state said cover anything that could possibly happen in the facility you referred to it as there by these are not polls who develop policies they aren't able to determine on the fly what should happen within


age of eighty one by all intents and purposes this is a de facto life sentence calvin would not only need to outlive the life expectancy of a prisoner which is sixty four years but he would need to outlive a life expectancy of the general united states


before it at that time fit into the miller factors that the supreme court set forth there and home and then also the sentencing statute and they concluded that the p s side and the evidence presented out


shade fail to prove accidental injury it didn't say the death of the rationale of the of the arbitrator the boilerplate language that it uses when it essentially rubber stamps an arbitration decision is that affirmative and adopts the decision doesn't say anything about the rationale


throughout the trial and trial period she was extremely consistent defendants testimony however was less credible there was prior convictions introduced but he was a convicted felon although this was driving on a revoked license he


that's why you report potential claims just the white west about yes you report on a policy applies to a claim which is a demand for money or services or the filing of a suit or arbitration it is


bankrupt by the reality of it is i couldn't sustain then nor now in fact the of the expenses that are related to my financial affairs affidavit what was noted is exactly on point there is no excess


than one party council what is the remedy and the statute for a violation of those two for a violation of signing in more than one or being a candidate more than one yet if your statutory remedy


in that situation that was decided pre the ira or the that deficit reduction act of two thousand and five which is a bit of a foot of the field but


as we indicated you know planning is appropriate in me even be malpractise for a counselor or an advisor to this woman not to advise that she do that to get the protection for her own daughter there's


isn't the case just like this one out of this district and that was the clearly erroneous standard applying the facts applying the law rather that we agree on what the what the regs are the facts that are established by the record that's the this court is left with


parties involved and in this particular case when they've agreed on let's say day one is beneficial to all five in the room as to a division around they get done on day two or three or four decide you know what we do know like the division


as evidence of mutual combat sufficient to mitigate the killing of that victim so that version that they said did not support a propagation jury instruction because the witness has suggested that the defendant


residency in one medical school and then didn't complete that residency he then went to the other residency university of massachusetts general surgery where he completed residency but when he was asked about his postgraduate


aside it is this that was sore pointed out he had his client examined by dr paul dr cohen took a history from this gentleman with this claim in mind i mean that's why he


me i don't know there's a there's a number of years and possibly if she came here and said she has no interest i asked if the house had been listed there was any reason to do it you could even support


modest compared to many government jobs and and this area that is more than modest because there haven't been any increases for a lot of lawyers over a number of years


the focus of attention of cross examination of plaintiff's expert both at his deposition and at trial that six twenty two was presented to the expert class


if we rule in your favor all those questions that i have in my mind they just try to articulate to you won't make any difference what like well if you give me if we will for you your


however when it's right in front of your ranch and all they had to really do here was just paint some yellow paint on this edge and it would have stood out like a sore thumb then if somebody trips


judge says ok you've got enough here then he's got enough if the judge says no you don't go out and find more that he's got to do that


problem the items they were looking for i was going to mention that on the initial execution of the search warrant the items for not found there was a subsequent search and the items were later found i believe in a garage located


actually fashion a remedy for him that allowed his option on average yes yes and that was actually a creative way to do it it was a way that we believe is justified by the law and allowed him


sure my client has problems financial problems also if you look at their site resuscitation actually see that my


establishes the existence of the condition and its character of not being reasonably safe would not have been discovered by an inspection system that was reasonably adequate considering the practicality costs


lid to the top of the grass and the trial court here very intelligently recognized that if they it's the measurement we're talking about it's the wrong measurement because we don't walk on the top of the grass


claiming that they failed to bring this action in the timely fashion now that's not our claim our our claim is that there was no our position is that the contract does not say what he says it says the recital for example look


ordered to reach a big thirty after initial deliberations ended in deadlock staton is a member of no more deaths which has worked for years to provide migrant with humanitarian aid over the past decade nearly two thousand men women and children have died while


late friday chief information officers monogram so that the county would be wanted to be as transparent as possible by putting both proposals and cons county's website proposals are not competitive and there is no risk to go shooting to deal with them


thirty thousand to thirty five thousand new troops on a ferry deployment over the next twelve to eighteen months meanwhile u s officials are pressing nato for an additional ten thousand troops to augment the u s troop surge you know i'm sure is a prominent


are treated more like animals than like human bein's jimmy carter also called for an investigation into war crimes committed by israel he said there is no explanation responsibility for those terrible human rights crimes lives


today's world news headlines china earthquake passes two thousand air travel resumes on europe's a missed new ash warnings and u s and claims killings of two militant leaders and iran bars to opposition


call is fifteen minutes fifteen minutes i don't have that kind of time i need a gun to protect myself it's my right as an american another program gun rally was also held held in virginia where attendees openly carry guns on their hips and over their shoulders was the first national


said no great civilization has risen without great commerce and no civilization has endured that has not protected and defended its commerce that is why i am honored to receive this award this is the twenty second year that the u


monitoring the face energy commission website w w dot cash for appliances dot org and will receive immediate notification when the program ends here's the contact information for the three grass valley stores involved


mourning i'm sure the entire world mourns with us tonight the acting president has declared seven days of mourning during which the period the nigerian flag will fly at half mast acting president goodluck jonathan was sworn in to replace you are a do earlier yesterday


but i have yet to hear from obama administration what the flaws in a report that they've identified are i mean i'd be happy to respond to them if and when i know what they are last week to us voted against the un human rights council resolution endorsing reports recommendation that


into the economy was the stimulus directly to the consumers so we could spend it back into businesses and help our economy instead the monies went to the banks wall street and auto conglomerates who stuffed their pockets and still lay off workers and choke


and he said quote with respect to sanctions i think that we have a strong number of countries on the security council who believe this is the right thing to do but i think these negotiations can be difficult and i'm going to push as hard as i can to make


in another story written by liz keller a civil suit filed by publisher of the union against a man he alleged ledges attacked him in his office has been referred to judicial arbitration the suit filed in nevada county superior court claims


her neighbor's chickens were in her yard it chicken was returned to its home called nine one one two twelve thirty five pm a woman from two hundred block of south school street reported the neighbor said he was going to record her conversations draw forty eight


jurors also agreed with a special finding that the burning of the store caused more than two hundred thousand dollars in damages several members of tauruses family were present the owners of the store's surjit singh and hard core and their son raj dylan did


afghan capital kabul the dead include twelve civilians six nato troops five of them american another forty seven people were wounded it was the first major attack to hit kabul since the bombings of two hotels in february that those attack for nato occupation force there


study coauthor and former pentagon advisor theodore polls told said poster woman screening the system is highly fragile and brittle and will intercept warheads only by accident if ever president obama criticized the missile system during his run for the white house


brigade a group of american volunteers who fought the defense is going to mock democratically elect government against a military coup led by general francisco franco backed by adolf hitler and italian dictator benito mussolini and that's it for today's


barrels six reporters based in new york los angeles and chicago will be reassigned after their offices are closed at the end of the year and then new york state officials and developers high end of massive stadium project have want


it's logical the man had a couple of decades to work during added they've socked away some money and they're looking for a change one of the goals of the film was to make it collaboration with dad i didn't


criticized for hiring of keeping back or and labor nations mark marking anniversary of martin luther king assassination and thousands march on offices of anti union koch industries


difficult days ahead i will look to them and my entire national security team for their counsel continuity and unity of effort at this moment in history demands speaking after obama panetta said his top priority will be to ensure that the united states


visitor to the tree farm can sample fresh hot coffee in large wooden sign advised his patrons to watch for stumps and go for holes bernie isn't the only person working for a business is time of year farmers are offering precut and cut your own pints and first dot western


for fifty five pm a call from three and a block austin reported a man who possibly was drunk ran to his property yelling about be chased by someone another caller from thread a block a gram in the street reported the man was in her backyard saying he had radiation poisoning he


the president has increased four hundred percent since president obama took office in january as a nation's first african american president according to author ronald kessler obama and skills with obama as a target of more than thirty potential death threats


i'm not going to comment some parents who oppose transfer including madonna lang wonder whether mattson actually made the request even though the board reported it as a request from the principal in its minutes from the march fourteenth special meeting lang and kelly valen


it received anonymous reports of infractions including short cuts on testing new generators on reported safety violations falsifying records promoting a culture of cover up and ignoring chronic fatigue among overburdened workers that's it


a lot of traffic and take that into consideration he said thursday afternoon principal marty matheson was escorting students across the street he did not return a call for comment


system police were honorable to locate the woman the fifteen pm caller from one hundred block burial drive reported a man was stalking her police advised her of the restraining order process it seventeen p m caller from one


are still fifty thousand troops in iraq there's attacks on pakistan now of course he's been part of a third attack on a muslim country in ten years bombing of libya and we oppose all those things and we believe that american foreign policy isn't changing and house


be proactive as they alert parents they're attempting to make sure that people don't panic while making them more watchful of their children's health the associated press reported monday that the flu is suspected in the death of one


see the afghan government meanwhile is coming under influential pressure to drop a law that effectively legalizes rape within marriage and further restrict women's rights according to the guardian of london


refusal to also raise its security council backed cease fire protests continue against the gaza attack on wednesday more than one thousand palestinians gathered west bank city of hebron and in israel


december nineteenth so while you drugs mark your calendars in grass valley law enforcement officers at the checkpoints will be looking for anyone driving under the influence also will be checking driver's licenses grass valleys police captain dave


actually be very blunt ten billion dollars will not buy developing countries people and confidence so that democrats appear to have finalized the deal on removing a government funded public insurance option from the health care reform bill on tuesday senate


association members are tight knit group collaborating to keep each other accountable for providing for breakfast to their guests and offering a clean establishment we can get more done when there's more people working together barbara pinch


have welcomed a grocery store although a holiday market is close by those in favor also said the new center would reduce shopping trips to auburn and grass valley easy in traffic on busy highway forty nine cats until family of nevada