# data[].attributes.body
Idaho

State v. Stewart, 234 P.3d 707 (2010)

The defendant filed a motion to dismiss based on double jeopardy arguing that he could not be charged for the crime of stalking as a misdemeanor and stalking as a felony as the elements of both crimes were the same. The Idaho Supreme Court examined the double jeopardy issue and determined that the lower court had not examined it properly. The Court determined that misdemeanor stalking was not a separate offense from felony stalking, rather it was a lesser included offense of felony stalking—the felony stalking statute incorporates the misdemeanor stalking statute by reference.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Michigan Supreme Court has publicly censured a judge for setting "grossly excessive" bail and showing a "severe attitude" toward witnesses and litigants.

Judge Norene Redmond of Eastpointe was censured after the court reviewed her actions in three cases, according to the Detroit Free Press and Detroit News. The cases involved allegations that Redmond:

-Raised the bond for a woman after she was told the woman's son had called her an asshole outside the courtroom.

-Set bonds at $750,000 and $1 million for two men accused of overbilling an elderly woman for a paint job.

-Ordered a resident to serve 30 days in jail for throwing a loud party at her home. The court said Redmond failed to disclose she knew some of the complaining neighbors and referred to the defendant's home as a "flophouse."

The opinion (PDF) cited several problems with the judge's conduct, saying she failed to impose reasonable punishment, allowed outside relationships to influence her judgment, and failed to act courteously.

The judge's conduct demonstrates "a severe attitude toward witnesses, tending to prevent the proper presentation of the cause or ascertainment of the truth, and failure to avoid a controversial manner or tone in addressing litigants or witnesses," the court said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Judge Censured for Excessive Bail, Severe Attitude

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Michigan Supreme Court has publicly censured a judge for setting "grossly excessive" bail and showing a "severe attitude" toward witnesses and litigants. Judge Norene Redmond of Eastpointe was censured after the court reviewed her actions in three cases, according to the Detroit Free Press and Detroit News.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By David Mcfadden, Associated Press Writer

GUANTANAMO BAY NAVAL BASE, Cuba — A U.S. military judge barred the Pentagon Tuesday from using a Guantanamo prisoner's confession to Afghan authorities as trial evidence, saying it was obtained through torture.

Army Col. Stephen Henley said Mohammed Jawad's statements "were obtained by physical intimidation and threats of death which, under the circumstances, constitute torture."

Jawad's defense attorney, Air Force Maj. David Frakt, told The Associated Press that the ruling removes "the lynchpin of the government's case."

Guantanamo's chief prosecutor, Army Col. Lawrence Morris, said he recognized how the judge made his decision and needed to study the ruling before making more comments.

Jawad, who was still a teenager at the time, is accused of injuring two U.S. soldiers with a grenade in 2002. He allegedly said during his interrogation in Kabul that he hoped the Americans died, and would do it again.

But Henley said Jawad confessed only after police commanders and high-ranking Afghan government officials threatened to kill him and his family -- a strategy intended to inflict severe pain that constitutes torture.

"During the interrogation, someone told the accused, 'You will be killed if you do not confess to the grenade attack,' and, 'We will arrest your family and kill them if you do not confess,' or words to that effect," Henley wrote in response to a defense motion to suppress the evidence. "It was a credible threat."

Frakt said the ruling is a "further disintegration of the government's case," and that the Afghans' descriptions of Jawad's confession were never credible to begin with. He also praised the judge for "adopting a traditional definition of torture rather than making one up."

The judge said torture includes statements obtained by use of death threats to the speaker or his family, and that actual physical or mental injury is not required. "The relevant inquiry is whether the threat was specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering upon another person within the interrogator's custody or control," Henley wrote.

Hina Shamsi, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, welcomed the ruling, but alleged "evidence obtained through torture and coercion is pervasive in military commission cases that, by design, disregard the most fundamental due process rights, and no single decision can cure that."

Tuesday's ruling comes a few weeks after Jawad's former Guantanamo prosecutor, U.S. Army Lt. Col. Darrel Vandeveld, quit after what he described as a crisis of conscience over the ethical handling of cases at the U.S. base.

He said evidence he saw -- some of which was withheld from defense attorneys -- suggested Jawad may have been drugged before the 2002 attack.

Copyright 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

To report corrections and clarifications, contact Reader Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification.

Guidelines: You share in the USA TODAY community, so please keep your comments smart and civil. Don't attack other readers personally, and keep your language decent. Use the "Report Abuse" button to make a difference. Read more.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Judge tosses detainee confession citing torture - USATODAY.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By David Mcfadden, Associated Press Writer GUANTANAMO BAY NAVAL BASE, Cuba - A U.S. military judge barred the Pentagon Tuesday from using a Guantanamo prisoner's confession to Afghan authorities as trial evidence, saying it was obtained through torture. Army Col.

# data[].attributes.headline
Michigan Supreme Court: Police Trespassed

# data[].attributes.subject
Michigan Supreme Court: Police Trespassed

# data[].attributes.body
... The decision centered on a controversial tactic known as a “knock and talk,” which involves law enforcement approaching homes in order to question the residents and win permission to search inside. Notably, this ruling echoes a dissent written last year by none other than Neil Gorsuch, before he was elevated to the U.S. Supreme Court. The case dates back to March 18, 2014, when Michael Frederick was jostled awake at 4 o’clock in the morning by loud, insistent knocking. Answered the door, Frederick was greeted by seven armed and vested officers from the Kent Area Narcotics Enforcement Team (KANET). KANET officers asked Frederick if he had any marijuana butter. After he consented to a search, officers found both marijuana butter and a batch of pot brownies in his home.
A little over an hour later, KANET officers repeated the knock and talk at the home of Todd Van Doorne. He agreed to a search, allowing law enforcement to find and confiscate marijuana butter. At the time, both Frederick and Van Doorne worked as jail guards in the Kent County Sheriff’s Department. Both have since lost their jobs and been charged with cannabis offenses.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Library Exhibits :: Chaos in the Streets: The Philadelphia Riots of 1844

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Welcome to Chaos in the Streets: The Philadelphia Riots of 1844. In May and July of 1844 Philadelphia was at the epicenter of religious and ethnic rioting and violence aimed at Catholic and Irish immigrants.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
National Center for Constitutional Studies

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
*Congress of the United States

begun and held at the City of New-York, on Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.

THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution. RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all, or any of which Articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution; viz. ARTICLES in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution.

Frederick Augustus Muhlenberg Speaker of the House of Representatives John Adams, Vice-President of the United States and President of the Senate.

Attest, John Beckley, Clerk of the House of Representatives. Sam. A. Otis Secretary of the Senate. *On September 25, 1789, Congress transmitted to the state legislatures twelve proposed amendments, two of which, having to do with Congressional representation and Congressional pay, were not adopted. The remaining ten amendments became the Bill of Rights.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

A well-regulated M ilitia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear A rms shall not be infringed.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.

Amendment 6
- Rights of Accused Persons in Criminal Cases

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor; and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States than according to the rules of the common law.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Preamble to the Bill of Rights *Congress of the United States begun and held at the City of New-York, on Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.

# data[].attributes.headline
Curtis Flowers faces 6th trial for the same crime

# data[].attributes.subject
Curtis Flowers faces 6th trial for the same crime