Afternoon memoirs: Internet research is costly for the juror; partially resuscitated bar dues request
Image from Shutterstock.
Federal juror internet search cost over $ 11,000
A federal judge in New Jersey convicted a juror of contempt and fined him over $ 11,000 for researching the Internet into a case, despite warnings against such conduct. U.S. District Judge Robert Kugler of the New Jersey District had declared the trial overturned after learning the juror shared his findings online with other jurors. The juror had searched for a crest on an immigration officer’s uniform after other jurors suggested it was a union logo. The juror said the patch was a white supremacist logo. The accused was accused of resisting an arrest of immigrants. The fine represented the costs associated with the constitution of the jury. (Law360, US Attorney’s Office press release, Reuters)
The 10th circuit partly resuscitates the demand for contributions to the bar
The 10th U.S. Court of Appeals in Denver partly resurrected a compulsory tuition challenge from the Oklahoma Bar Association. The court said plaintiff Mark E. Schell plausibly alleged that the Oklahoma Bar Journal erroneously used mandatory dues to discuss issues of an ideological nature, rather than issues related to the bar’s primary purpose of regulate the legal profession and improve the quality of legal services. But the 10th Circuit said the US Supreme Court precedent bars Schell’s claim that his free speech rights are violated by mandatory dues spent on basic activities. (Bloomberg Law, Reuters)
The entire prosecution launched the case
The Arizona Supreme Court upheld a trial judge’s decision to bar the entire Tucson, Arizona state attorney general’s office from handling a new trial in a murder case. The trial judge had the discretion to blame Deputy Attorney General Richard Wintory’s misconduct across the office, the state Supreme Court said. Wintory had engaged in a series of inappropriate telephone conversations with a confidential intermediary who had been appointed to help the defense find mitigating evidence. He consented to a 90-day suspension from practicing law in connection with the incident, according to Tucson.com. (The Legal Profession Blog, Arizona Capitol Times, Arizona Supreme Court decision)