SCOTUS will wrestle with Double Jeopardy conundrum

The U.S. Supreme Court will today hear arguments in Evans v. Michigan, a case involving a Double Jeopardy pretzel. In Evans the trial court misinterpreted the underlying charge to require an element that the prosecution did not actually have to prove. Finding that element missing, the trial judge granted a mid-trial judgment of acquittal. On the prosecution's appeal, Michigan appellate courts held that the trial judge's erroneous acquittal did not constitute an "acquittal" for Double Jeopardy purposes, and that the defendant could be retried. SCOTUS granted cert. and will hear arguments today. The US SG has weighed in on Michigan's side.

Florida v. Jardines SCOTUS argument . . .

After reading today's oral argument transcript from Florida v. Jardines . . . I'm guessing Florida will lose the case because the police officer's warrantless visit to the defendant's front door, accompanied by a drug-sniffing dog, violated the Fourth Amendment. There was a lot of discussion, though, suggesting that a Girl Scout selling cookies would not be a Fourth Amendment violation . . .

Forensic "science:" how reliable?

PBS's NOVA recently ran Forensics on Trial, a program that focused on the flaws in what passes for "science" in criminal trials. The program raises many questions about the validity of evidence that is often accepted in court, notwithstanding its dubious validity. H/T Eric Metaxas.

And as the World Series opens . . .

. . . Judge Savage releases Stewart v. Stewart, a case involving ownership of significant MLB memorabilia accumulated by a former AL umpire.

First Circuit rejects asylum claim

A Guatemalan man who proves (1) that a bus driven by his father in Guatemala was bombed by guerrillas; (2) that his mother was robbed by guerrillas; (3) that as a teenager he rejected recruitment efforts by guerrillas and fears persecution if returned to Guatemala; and (4) that if returned there from the U.S. there is a likelihood he will be targeted for perceived wealth . . . has no basis for asylum in the U.S., the First Circuit rules in Escobar v. Holder. Judge Boudin (from the comfort, no doubt, of Boston's palatial, heavily-protected federal courthouse) scoffs at Escobar's fears: ". . . being a target for thieves on account of perceived wealth, whether the perception is temporary or permanent, is merely a condition of living where crime is rampant and poorly controlled."

By 3-2 vote SCORI rejects Tobon recount petition

The Rhode Island Supreme Court this afternoon issued an Order denying certiorari in District 58 Candidate Tobon's request for a hand recount of Rep. San Bento's one-vote primary victory. The majority concluded that the Court had no authority to order hand recount. Dissenting Chief Justice Suttell and Justice Goldberg read the statutes and case law to permit, indeed require, a hand recount under the circumstances.

Extending Appendi?

The United States Supreme Court today granted cert. to review the Fourth Circuit's decision in United States v. Alleyne. This is a new case in the Apprendi line, wherein the Court will decide whether a federal district court can enhance the sentence in a robbery case for the defendant's "brandishing" of a firearm, where there is no specific jury finding on that fact (he was, however, convicted of "use or carry" of a firearm during the robbery). For Alleyne to prevail, the Supreme Court would have to overrule their 2002 decision in Harris v. United States; the cert. grant invites argument on that point.