Sentences with phrase «person in a criminal trial»

Not exact matches

FX said 12 million people tuned in for the first episode of producer Ryan Murphy's (Glee, American Horror Story) series, which seems to have successfully reignited American viewers» obsession with one of the most high - profile criminal trials ever.

Singing Bear, who's been named a witness in Ray's criminal trial, says he doesn't allow more than 20 people in a sweat because each person needs to be looked out for and protected.

The Kirchners pushed to restart criminal trials against members of the military junta — for a variety of reasons, prior attempts to bring to justice those responsible for the disappearance, torture and murder of over 30,000 people by agents of the state were first halted and later resulted in amnesty.

This year, in the budget debate, the three men are also agreeing to rules for Uber, Lyft, and other ride sharing upstate; raising the age at which people are considered an adult for criminal trials; and a plan for making the SUNY system tuition free for many.

This will be the second criminal trial for Sheldon Silver, 74, a Democrat who was once among the most politically powerful people in the state.

The final budget deal, as expected, did not include a range of non-fiscal matters, including extending the statute of limitations in child abuse cases, school safety measures, gun control, relaxing certain criminal bail requirements and any bolstering of ethics and campaign finance laws in reaction to what has become an annual parade of Albany corruption cases, including two major trials this year of people with close ties to Cuomo.

«This is a problem that faces us relating to a handful of people in this country including Abu Qatada whereby you've got intelligence but not evidence that can be used in a criminal trial.

Justice AdemoIa held that in criminal trial an accused person is assumed innocent until proven guilty and that a citizens health is very paramount in any trial case and before the law.

He warned that his government should not be tagged as engaging in a political trial when the government begins prosecuting people for the criminal acts committed

«What's going on in the trial, in my mind, is much more important that the criminal charges against a few people,» DeFrancisco said.

There are a lot of pending criminal cases in respect of which of the accused persons standing trials made offers for plea bargain.

Before proceeding to pronounce his sentence on the accused persons, Justice Ekwo said that mere denial did not suffice as defence in criminal trial.

As a trial attorney, he handled all sorts of criminal cases in state and federal court and he has represented approximately 30 people charged with homicide, including several who have faced the death penalty.

Look at these blogs, numerous since the Stevenson trial: All this talk of killing, poisoning, calling cats criminals for walking on plants to pooping in gardens, and calling for their deaths... what about birds, pooping on our windshields, on our sidewalks, taking down airplanes, causing the avian flu that killed 50 million people 80 yrs ago, and preparing to do the exact same thing again... still are cat people joking about putting about poison bird seed, mass extermination of birds...

As I dug deeper I was struck by the sense of outrage and loss this painting aroused in so many people: The family of Lea Bondi, determined to reclaim the stolen portrait she had failed to recover in her lifetime; the Manhattan District Attorney who sent shock waves through the international art world and enraged many of New York's most prominent cultural organizations when he issued a subpoena and launched a criminal investigation following the surprise resurfacing of Portrait of Wally; the New York art dealer who tipped off a reporter about the painting during the opening of the Schiele exhibition at MoMA; the Senior Special Agent at the Department of Homeland Security who vowed not to retire until the fight was over; the art theft investigator who unearthed the post-war subterfuge and confusion that ultimately landed the painting in the hands of a young, obsessed Schiele collector; the museum official who testified before Congress that the seizure of Portrait of Wally could have a crippling effect on the ability of American museums to borrow works of art; the Assistant United States Attorney who took the case to the eve of trial; and the legendary Schiele collector who bartered for Portrait of Wally in the early 1950s and fought to the end of his life to bring it home to Vienna.

(7) records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that the production of such law enforcement records or information (A) could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings, (B) would deprive a person of a right to a fair trial or to an impartial adjudication, (C) could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, (D) could reasonably be expected to disclose the identity of a confidential source, including a State, local or foreign agency or authority or any private institution which furnished information on a confidential basis, and, in the case of a record or information compiled by criminal law enforcement authority in the course of a criminal investigation or by an agency conducting a lawful national security intelligence investigation, information furnished by a confidential source, (E) would disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions, or would disclose guidelines for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions if such disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law, or (F) could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any individual; [the law enforcement exemption]

The sagacity of juries is perhaps best captured by a bit of advice from a juror in a criminal trial whose comment is relevant to every litigator: «Make your point and move on — we are reasonably intelligent people and have been paying attention to the testimony.»

Nevertheless, the fact that a person, below the low income cut - off, has his or her income largely consumed by those basic necessities obviously means that they do not have sufficient income to allow for extraordinary expenses, such as the fees necessary to retain a criminal defence lawyer to provide representation in a criminal jury trial.

Many people are familiar with the requirement to prove a case «beyond a reasonable doubt,» which is the standard used in a criminal trial.

What many people don't realize, however, is that just like in other criminal cases, you are entitled to a trial for your traffic ticket.

Justice Moldaver then turns to what is described as practical considerations for law enforcement and the administration of justice, at paras. 183 - 6, suggesting that (a) the disclosure of text messages received by a complainant could be challenged by a sender who is alleged to have abused the complainant and thus exposes vulnerable complainants such as children, people with mental disabilities and the elderly (b) the increased need for warrants could strain police and judicial resources in an overburdened criminal justice system and (c) at the trial stage, these repercussions could complicate and prolong proceedings where defendants have standing to challenge searches conducted against collateral targets in large prosecutions.

From his office in downtown Minneapolis and in trial courts throughout the region — including North Dakota, South Dakota and Iowa — he provides high - quality, aggressive representation for people facing serious criminal charges such as:

«Few people realize that the real administrative and workload burden on our justice system comes not from complex criminal trials, but rather from the ever - increasing flood of minor offences which is threatening to engulf the administration of justice in this province.

The first is this week's Macleans which is unprecedented in giving over 50 % of its space to People v. Conrad Black, Baron Black of Crossharbour, the major criminal trial taking place this month in Chicago.

In practice, federal defense attorneys must advise the People they represent that with the federal sentencing guidelines and often mandatory minimum sentencing statutes, a trial tax has been made explicit, and institutionalized as part of the federal criminal law.

Federal criminal lawyers are faced with defending their people in a court where the «Constitutional right» to a trial is but a shadow of what a meaningful right to jury trial once was.

Most people think that perjury can only occur when you are on the witness stand in a criminal trial.

What with courtroom deputies, judges and prosecutors all bearing arms in Texas, defense lawyers and their clients may be the only unarmed people present in a criminal trial.

In particular, while they each rely on solid premises (the presumption of innocence; the re-victimization of sexual assault complainants), they undermine important and complex conversations about defending a criminal accused in a sexual assault trial, and in particular defending a factually guilty person accused of sexual assaulIn particular, while they each rely on solid premises (the presumption of innocence; the re-victimization of sexual assault complainants), they undermine important and complex conversations about defending a criminal accused in a sexual assault trial, and in particular defending a factually guilty person accused of sexual assaulin a sexual assault trial, and in particular defending a factually guilty person accused of sexual assaulin particular defending a factually guilty person accused of sexual assault.

Robbery is a straight indictable offence in the Criminal Code, which means that robbery always involves the right of an accused person to have a preliminary inquiry and a trial by judge and jury, if the accused person wishes to.

Attorney Michael O'Meara is an experienced trial lawyer who has defended countless criminal charges in courts in and around Chicago and helped numerous people charged with criminal traffic offenses to avoid jail time and fines and keep their drivers» licenses.

«Any self - incriminating statement made in family proceedings would only be admissible in a criminal trial if the person who made it repeated it in a subsequent interview with the police.

No doubt an in - person appearance is best for trials, but for things like criminal set - dates, and maybe even submissions, video may be a perfectly plausible option.

Norm Pattis is veteran of more than 100 successful jury trials, many resulting in acquittals for people charged with serious crimes, multi million dollar civil rights and discrimination verdicts, and successful criminal appeals.

People typically don't contact a trial lawyer unless something has gone wrong in their life — an accident, a divorce or a criminal charge.

The American criminal justice system is far from being sufficiently enlightened, starting by too many presumed - innocent people caged without bond pending sentencing, moving to Virginia's crabbed criminal discovery system, continuing to Virginia's system that allows prosecutors to scare defendants to plead guilty by their refusal to waive a jury that in many instances and locations can mean more racist jurors than judges on top of the jurors often being more wild cards than judges for sentencing, continuing to the many judges who choose judicial efficiency over a fair trial, continuing to the brutal capital punishment system, cntinuing to excessive mandatory minimum and guideline sentencing, and continuing to the slew of innocent convicted people (many of whom plead gulilty rather than risking a worse fate), and continuing to frequently excessive sentences and excessive probation violation sentences.

In all cases of criminal contempt arising under the provisions of this act, the accused, upon conviction, shall be punished by fine or imprisonment or both; Provided however, that in case the accused is a natural person the fine to be paid shall not exceed the sum of $ 1,000, nor shall impriSonment exceed the term of six months; Provided further, That in any such proceeding for criminal contempt, at the discretion of the judge, the accused may be tried with or without a jury; Provided further, however, That in the event such proceeding for criminal contempt be tried before a judge without a jury and the sentence of the court on conviction is a fine in excess of the sum of $ 300 or imprisonment in excess of forty five days, the accused in said proceeding upon demand therefor, shall be entitled to a trial de novo before a jury, which shall conform as near as may be to the practice in other criminal caseIn all cases of criminal contempt arising under the provisions of this act, the accused, upon conviction, shall be punished by fine or imprisonment or both; Provided however, that in case the accused is a natural person the fine to be paid shall not exceed the sum of $ 1,000, nor shall impriSonment exceed the term of six months; Provided further, That in any such proceeding for criminal contempt, at the discretion of the judge, the accused may be tried with or without a jury; Provided further, however, That in the event such proceeding for criminal contempt be tried before a judge without a jury and the sentence of the court on conviction is a fine in excess of the sum of $ 300 or imprisonment in excess of forty five days, the accused in said proceeding upon demand therefor, shall be entitled to a trial de novo before a jury, which shall conform as near as may be to the practice in other criminal casein case the accused is a natural person the fine to be paid shall not exceed the sum of $ 1,000, nor shall impriSonment exceed the term of six months; Provided further, That in any such proceeding for criminal contempt, at the discretion of the judge, the accused may be tried with or without a jury; Provided further, however, That in the event such proceeding for criminal contempt be tried before a judge without a jury and the sentence of the court on conviction is a fine in excess of the sum of $ 300 or imprisonment in excess of forty five days, the accused in said proceeding upon demand therefor, shall be entitled to a trial de novo before a jury, which shall conform as near as may be to the practice in other criminal casein any such proceeding for criminal contempt, at the discretion of the judge, the accused may be tried with or without a jury; Provided further, however, That in the event such proceeding for criminal contempt be tried before a judge without a jury and the sentence of the court on conviction is a fine in excess of the sum of $ 300 or imprisonment in excess of forty five days, the accused in said proceeding upon demand therefor, shall be entitled to a trial de novo before a jury, which shall conform as near as may be to the practice in other criminal casein the event such proceeding for criminal contempt be tried before a judge without a jury and the sentence of the court on conviction is a fine in excess of the sum of $ 300 or imprisonment in excess of forty five days, the accused in said proceeding upon demand therefor, shall be entitled to a trial de novo before a jury, which shall conform as near as may be to the practice in other criminal casein excess of the sum of $ 300 or imprisonment in excess of forty five days, the accused in said proceeding upon demand therefor, shall be entitled to a trial de novo before a jury, which shall conform as near as may be to the practice in other criminal casein excess of forty five days, the accused in said proceeding upon demand therefor, shall be entitled to a trial de novo before a jury, which shall conform as near as may be to the practice in other criminal casein said proceeding upon demand therefor, shall be entitled to a trial de novo before a jury, which shall conform as near as may be to the practice in other criminal casein other criminal cases.

That's why a person can be found not guilty in a criminal trial, but still be found liable for damages in a civil case.

Led by Attorney John Totten — one of the top trial lawyers in North Alabama — we have extensive experience representing good people throughout Alabama in the areas of family law, personal injury and criminal defense.

Mr. Stern and Mr. DiStefano are members of the firm's Government Investigations / Criminal Defense Practice Group, which has wide experience in representing professionals and business persons in high stakes investigations and trials, including effectively cross-examining government cooperating witnesses and obtaining favorable courtroom results.

When on 1 December 2014 the Appeals Chamber upheld the decision of Trial Chamber I to condemn Thomas Lubanga Dyilo to 14 years of imprisonment for the enlistment and conscription of children under the age of 15, the Congolese warlord, who had already gone down in history as the first person transferred to the International Criminal Court, became also the first war criminal to serve a final sentence given by the international tCriminal Court, became also the first war criminal to serve a final sentence given by the international tcriminal to serve a final sentence given by the international tribunal.

For criminal defendants who committed no crime, the pressure can feel harder in deciding whether to go to trial or enter a negotiated settlement, seeing that sometimes innocent people get convicted, whether because of false testimony, erroneous connection to evidence, or faulty evidence.

In a criminal case, the assumption that the defendant is basically a law abiding person which applies in civil cases no longer holds true once probable cause has been demonstrated to an independent magistrate, even though the defendant is presumed innocent for the purpose of an ultimate triaIn a criminal case, the assumption that the defendant is basically a law abiding person which applies in civil cases no longer holds true once probable cause has been demonstrated to an independent magistrate, even though the defendant is presumed innocent for the purpose of an ultimate triain civil cases no longer holds true once probable cause has been demonstrated to an independent magistrate, even though the defendant is presumed innocent for the purpose of an ultimate trial.

Canada Federal government drops Supreme Court CSIS overseas spying appeal, Canadian Press Sleeping man who admitted to raping a sleeping woman wins a new trial, Canadian Press Calgary man charged for flying in balloon rigged chair, Canadian Press United States Former Goldman Sachs programmer wins dismissal of second criminal conviction, Reuters U.S. appeals court upholds decision to strike down Puerto Rican bankruptcy law, Reuters International School teachers among people arrested for promoting Islamic State, Reuters International judge resigns from U.N. - backed war crimes trials in Cambodia, Reuters

«I think, from my perspective as someone from outside the legal profession, the spectre of being on a stand in a criminal trial accusing someone of sexual assault is not a pretty one and it's not one that most people would choose to go into if they have all the information.»

For example, in R v Rogers [1995] 1 Cr App R 374, the exception was accepted to be applicable in principle in a criminal trial for possession of heroin, but the Court of Appeal found that the trial judge correctly excluded evidence that a deceased person had admitted that the heroin belonged to him and other people were «after him for the money for the heroin.»

«Every actor in the justice system has a responsibility to ensure that criminal proceedings are carried out in a manner that is consistent with an accused person's right to a trial within a reasonable time,» said the court.

One of the fundamental presumptions in Canadian criminal law is that a person arrested and charged with an offence will be out of custody prior to trial.

During Trial, cross-examination of the police officer witnesses by Vancouver Criminal Lawyer Emmet J. Duncan demonstrated serious problems with the Crown case that Client was the person that was driving on the night in question.

Common examples of such contempts are: publications which are intended or likely to prejudice the fair trial or conduct of criminal or civil proceedings; publications which scandalize or otherwise lower the authority of the court; and acts which interfere with or obstruct persons having duties to discharge in a court of justice.»