Sentences with phrase «federal judge and jury»

Not exact matches

A federal jury found Edwards not guilty on one count of violating campaign finance rule, and the judge declared a mistrial on the five remaining criminal charges.

John Kennedy repeatedly appointed segregationist judges to the federal bench in the South, and the civil rights case that Robert Kennedy most vigorously prosecuted involved charges brought against Albany, Georgia, activists for violating the rights of a white storeowner by boycotting his business because he had served on a jury that cleared the sheriff who had shot a black man three times in the neck at point - blank range.

A judge set a date for the start of jury selection in the federal corruption trial of former Nassau County Executive Edward Mangano and his wife, Linda, and former Town of Oyster Bay Supervisor John Venditto.

«I then did what a federal judge does when a jury is deadlocked and issued an Alan charge trying to get them to move on their positions.

He said the judge might have treated the instructions to the jury differently, and prosecutors «would have been even more careful» about making sure their summation and rebuttal arguments «completely conformed» with the court's new interpretation of the federal theft of honest services law.

Federal prosecutors have asked a district court judge for an anonymous and partially sequestered jury in the trial of man who allegedly has extensive contacts among ranking al Qaeda members and participated in a 2003 ambush that killed two American soldiers and wounded several others.

White Plains federal Judge Kenneth Karas ultimately opted against selecting a new jury and further delaying what is supposed to be a three - week trial.

A week from now, jury selection will begin at the Thurgood Marshall Federal Courthouse in Manhattan, Judge Valerie Caproni presiding, in the corruption trial of longtime and close Cuomo aide and confidant Joe Percoco and three others.

A federal judge seated a jury of six women and six men Monday in the federal corruption trial of former Nassau County Executive Edward Mangano and former Oyster Bay Town Supervisor John Venditto — as Mangano maintained he would be exonerated.

A New York federal judge ruled Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos and his son can stay free on bail while appealing their convictions on corruption charges, saying jury instructions in their trial could be flawed in light of a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling.

Law Department attorney Joshua Lax told Manhattan federal Judge Kevin Castel that the jury's November 2017 decision should be ignored because it erred in finding the city and the police liable in the 2012 shooting of Mohamed Bah.

Valerie E. Caproni, the presiding judge in Federal District Court, kept lawyers and prospective jurors at the courthouse late on Monday in order to ensure that jury selection did not take too long.

Chicago, Illinois (CNN)- A federal jury weighing the fate of former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich in his corruption trial told the judge on Thursday it has reached unanimous agreement on two of the 24 counts, but can not agree on 11 others and has yet to consider the rest.

A federal jury announced the guilty verdict on four counts of theft but could not reach a unanimous agreement on four additional counts of theft, fraud and conspiracy, leading Judge Frederic Block to declare a mistrial on those counts.

To the fullest extent permitted by law, by your access to the Sites, you agree that: (i) any claim, dispute or cause of action regarding the Sites or these Terms shall be brought individually (NOT AS PART OF A CLASS ACTION) in the federal or state courts of the State of New York, and, such claim / dispute / cause of action will be resolved by a judge and THE RIGHT TO A JURY TRIAL IS HEREBY EXPRESSLY WAIVED; (ii) you consent to the personal jurisdiction of such courts as the exclusive tribunal for adjudication of any such claim / dispute / cause of action, expressly waiving any right of forum non convenience, change of venue or like right; (iii) your recovery will be limited to actual out - of - pocket costs involved in specifically accessing the Sites (if any) and you expressly waive your right to all other forms of recovery, including by way of example only, punitive, consequential, indirect, incidental, special and exemplary damages as well as attorneys» fees for bringing such claim / dispute / cause of action; and (iv) the court shall apply the law of the State of New York in adjudicating any such claim / dispute / cause of action, except for the choice of law / conflict of law rules of the State of New York (or of any other jurisdiction which would result in the application of the law of any jurisdiction other than the State of New York).

David has tried cases to juries and judges in various state and federal courts throughout the U.S.. Before joining Stoel Rives, David was a law clerk for the Tenth Circuit of the United States Court of Appeals (1988 ‑ 1989) and in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana (1986 ‑ 1988).

Lawyers in Louisville, Ky., are asking a federal judge to set aside a jury verdict exonerating a police officer in a Taser - related death because they say the jury foreman researched the case on the Internet and used what he found to sway other jurors.

We represents businesses before state and federal courts, juries and judges, arbitration panels and state and federal administrative agencies, and United States Courts of Appeals, state appellate courts and administrative appeals boards.

There could be no greater intrusion on traditional state authority than federal tort reforms that tie the hands of local judges and juries.

· States Rights: There could be no greater intrusion on traditional state authority than federal tort reforms that tie the hands of local judges and juries.

Judge William G. Young At the recent annual meeting of the Massachusetts Bar Foundation, U.S. District Judge William G. Young, in accepting the Great Friend of Justice Award, delivered a thoughtful and impassioned speech decrying the decrease in jury trials in the federal courts.

Dean resolves construction disputes before judges, juries, arbitrators, and mediators and handles appeals in both state and federal courts.

Subsequent to obtaining the jury verdict, Mr. Rich and Ms. Elovecky persuaded a federal judge to bar the defendants from repeating false facts in the future.

During trial, your attorney and the federal prosecutor will present their legal arguments and evidence to a judge and / or jury.

These include: United States v. Resendiz - Ponce, which presents the question whether the omission of an element from a federal indictment can constitute harmless error (9th Circuit says no); Global Crossing Telecommunications, Inc. v. Metrophones Telecommunications, Inc., on whether a provider of pay phone services can sue a long distance carrier for alleged violations of the Federal Communications Commission's regulations concerning compensation for coinless pay phone calls (9th Circuit says yes); Cunningham v. California, a sentencing case involving whether whether California's Determinate Sentencing Law violates the 6th and 14th amendments to the U.S. Constitution by permitting California state court judges at sentencing to impose enhanced sentenced based on their determination of facts neither found by the jury nor admitted by the defendant; and Carey v. Musladin, reviewing the 9th Circuit's decision to overturn a murder conviction of a defendant who claimed he was denied a fair trial because the victim's relatives appeared in court wearing buttons with the deceased's picture ofederal indictment can constitute harmless error (9th Circuit says no); Global Crossing Telecommunications, Inc. v. Metrophones Telecommunications, Inc., on whether a provider of pay phone services can sue a long distance carrier for alleged violations of the Federal Communications Commission's regulations concerning compensation for coinless pay phone calls (9th Circuit says yes); Cunningham v. California, a sentencing case involving whether whether California's Determinate Sentencing Law violates the 6th and 14th amendments to the U.S. Constitution by permitting California state court judges at sentencing to impose enhanced sentenced based on their determination of facts neither found by the jury nor admitted by the defendant; and Carey v. Musladin, reviewing the 9th Circuit's decision to overturn a murder conviction of a defendant who claimed he was denied a fair trial because the victim's relatives appeared in court wearing buttons with the deceased's picture oFederal Communications Commission's regulations concerning compensation for coinless pay phone calls (9th Circuit says yes); Cunningham v. California, a sentencing case involving whether whether California's Determinate Sentencing Law violates the 6th and 14th amendments to the U.S. Constitution by permitting California state court judges at sentencing to impose enhanced sentenced based on their determination of facts neither found by the jury nor admitted by the defendant; and Carey v. Musladin, reviewing the 9th Circuit's decision to overturn a murder conviction of a defendant who claimed he was denied a fair trial because the victim's relatives appeared in court wearing buttons with the deceased's picture on them.

Federal and state court judges have been struggling with the issue, and many are now instructing juries to avoid using technology for case research.

Award - winning San Diego personal injury attorney John Gomez and his associates have appeared before judges and juries in both state and federal courts all over the country, and have delivered extraordinary results time and time again.

A majority of the American public might be surprised to learn that there is indisputable statistical evidence that the number of jury and non-jury trials in our country is, and has been, sharply declining, both in absolute and relative terms.1 For example, in 2010, only 2,154 jury trials were commenced in federal district courts, which means, on average, Article III judges tried fewer than four civil jury trials that year.

This distinction in a similar case years ago with regard to a similar federal jury tampering statute was recognized by the judge in that case, and she correctly dismissed the indictment.

We are regularly in state and federal courtrooms, know our clients» businesses, and can explain clearly to juries and judges the products and their design processes.

I try cases before juries and judges, and I argue cases before federal and state appellate courts.

At the end of the reply brief, it becomes clear that Samsung's short - term priority is the «quick links» patent, which the Federal Circuit patent held not to be infringed but the other circuit judges, in their controversial en banc decision, reinstated the district court ruling and jury verdict.

One bit of conventional wisdom that is commonly heard in the defense bar is that defendants should generally remove cases to federal court when they have the right to do so because juries are less prone to extreme verdicts and the judges are more favorable to defendants.

We have tried hundreds of cases before juries and judges, in federal and state courts, administrative bodies such as the Patent and Trademark Office and the International Trade Commission (ITC), Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) and in a myriad of foreign tribunals.

With years of trial experience, the Firm's lawyers are able to simplify and effectively convey the nuances of complex business disputes to state and federal court judges and juries, arbitration panels, administrative hearing officers, and in various appellate forums throughout the country.

The Vermont federal court in Burlington is equipped with several monitors placed directly in front of the jury box, at the witness stand, and the judge's bench.

Indeed, the greatest and most effective form of «patent reform» might simply be to knock these self - impressed patent litigators and Federal Circuit judges off their pedestals, recognize patent law as simply just another area of law in general, and present the issues to a jury without delay, followed by a review, if appropriate, in the appropriate Circuit Court of Appeals.

As a legal matter, Judge Landis (the commissioner and a former federal judge himself) could draw his own conclusions from this evidence; he wasn't bound to reach the same conclusion as the jury, particularly since a ban from baseball does not require proof beyond a reasonable dJudge Landis (the commissioner and a former federal judge himself) could draw his own conclusions from this evidence; he wasn't bound to reach the same conclusion as the jury, particularly since a ban from baseball does not require proof beyond a reasonable djudge himself) could draw his own conclusions from this evidence; he wasn't bound to reach the same conclusion as the jury, particularly since a ban from baseball does not require proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

We have tried many cases to verdict, before judges and juries, in state and federal courts throughout the country.

In an earlier ruling on the merits of the case, the Federal Circuit upheld Judge Matsch's decision setting aside the jury's verdict in favor of Medtronic and granting judgment as a matter of law in favor of BrainLAB.

The Federal Rules of Evidence, and the Arizona Rules of Evidence, outline various types of statements that are excluded by the Hearsay Rule, as well as exceptions to the Hearsay rule, and thus, may be heard and considered by a judge or jury.

The rule states that students are permitted to appear as counsel, under supervision, for «an appeal in the Court of Appeal, the Federal Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court of Canada; a civil or criminal jury trial; [and] a proceeding on an indictable offence, unless the offence is within the absolute jurisdiction of a provincial court judge.»

There is a well - established procedure in the federal courts of the United States, and similar structures in all state systems I'm familiar with, that allows the judge to overrule a civil jury if it finds that no reasonable jury could have reached the verdict they did.

Richard George Kopf, who blogs about life as a federal trial judge over at Hercules and the Umpire, did an interesting thought experiment in relation to this case where he wondered if it was appropriate to use a peremptory strike of a juror if that juror is ugly and your client doesn't want ugly people on the jury or the case is somehow related to physical beauty.

Indeed, every federal judge and every federal jury that has decided cases in this ongoing battle has ruled for Malone and Tinnus.

The private and in - chambers exercise of writing jury instructions as a test for opinion clarity would serve to focus the justices on the important work of assigning more precise role definitions for federal trial judges.

Oracle has opened a bid for another trial in its long - running feud with Google, telling federal judge William Alsup that a jury verdict in May that went in favour of Google was marred by the search engine company not revealing that it planned to extend Android use to laptops and desktops.

«Because we conclude that the declaring code and the structure, sequence, and organization of the API packages are entitled to copyright protection, we reverse the district court's copyrightability determination with instructions to reinstate the jury's infringement finding as to the 37 Java packages,» Federal Circuit Judge Kathleen O'Malley wrote in the judgement.