SCORIBLOG follows the Supreme Court of Rhode Island, topics related Rhode Island law, and other legal matters of interest to lawyers. The author of SCORIBLOG is Attorney Thomas M. Dickinson.
Tuesday, October 14, 2014
Big Changes Coming to Non-dispositive Motion Calendar in Providence.
Judge Richard Litch will institute some major changes to the Providence Superior Court Non-dispositive Motion Calendar, effective November 12. Non-dispositive motions are heard in Providence every Wednesday. Judge Licht's Order eliminates the general 9:30 Wednesday calendar call and requires counsel to email the clerk (provmotions@cours.ri.gov) by midnight Monday with some specific information regarding the motion and its nature. Formal matters will still be called at 9:30, medical subpoena matters at 10:45, ready matters at 11:00, and all discovery motions will be heard at 2:00 pm. Judge Licht has been testing some of these procedures since taking over the Motion Calendar in September, but they will now be fully implemented. h/t to Attorney Matt Jerzyk for spreading the word on Judge Licht's innovation.
Sunday, October 5, 2014
Red Mass at the Cathedral on Wed. Oct. 8 at 5:00 pm.
The Rhode Island legal community will participate in the Annual Red Mass, marking the opening of the judicial year, on Wed. Oct. 8 at 5:00 pm at the Cathedral of Saints Peter and Paul in Providence.
SCOTUS 2014 Term opens with a question of . . . . brake lights.
The United States Supreme Court will open its new term with a case that turns on whether a North Carolina police officer's erroneous application of the "defective brake light" statute could be the basis of a lawful arrest. In Heien v. North Carolina the defendant was driving a vehicle with only one operational brake light. Because the other brake light was not working, the police stopped the defendant's vehicle. During the course of the stop the police asked and obtained consent to search the vehicle, resulting in the discovery of cocaine. Defendant was charged with drug trafficking, and he moved to suppress the fruits of the search, claiming that the original stop had been unlawful. An intermediate appellate court in North Carolina accepted the argument, concluding that the applicable statute only required one working brake light, which defendant's vehicle had. Because there was no violation, the court reasoned, the stop itself was unlawful and all of its fruits were inadmissible. The North Carolina Supreme Court reversed holding that, notwithstanding the police officer's possible misapplication of the brake light statute, the stop itself was objectively reasonable based on the officer's reasonable understanding of the statute. The U.S. Supreme Court granted cert. and will hear arguments in the case on Monday October 6. Given the trend in recent Fourth Amendment Exclusionary Rule cases, this one seems likely to go the government's way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)