DOCSLIB.ORG

[CERTIFIED TRANSLATION] 1A in the PUERTO RICO SUPREME

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
[CERTIFIED TRANSLATION] 1A in the PUERTO RICO SUPREME [CERTIFIED TRANSLATION] 1a IN THE PUERTO RICO SUPREME COURT The People of Puerto Rico Respondent v. Luis M. Sánchez Valle Petitioner _______________________________________ The People of Puerto Rico Respondent v. Jaime Gómez Vázquez Petitioner ______________________________________ The People of Puerto Rico v. René Rivero Betancourt _______________________________________ The People of Puerto Rico v. Rafael A. Delgado Rodriguez _______________________________________ CC-2013-0068 CC-2013-0072 Opinion of the Court issued by Associate Judge Mr. MARTÍNEZ TORRES. In San Juan, Puerto Rico, on March 20, 2015 [CERTIFIED TRANSLATION] 2a To decide these consolidated cases, we must review the rule that we established in Pueblo v. Castro García, 120 P.R. Dec. 740 (1988). For the following reasons, we hereby overrule said precedent and hold that, pursuant to the constitutional protection against double jeopardy, and because Puerto Rico is not a federal state, a person who has been acquitted, convicted or prosecuted in federal court cannot be prosecuted for the same offense in the Puerto Rico courts. I A. CC-2013-0068 On September 28, 2008, the prosecution filed three charges against Mr. Luis M. Sánchez del Valle accusing him of: 1) a violation of Article 5.01 of the Puerto Rico Weapons Act, 25 P.R. Laws Ann. § 458, for selling a firearm without a permit; 2) a second violation of Article 5.01 of the Puerto Rico Weapons Act, supra, for selling ammunition without a permit; and 3) a violation of Article 5.04 of the Puerto Rico Weapons Act, 25 P.R. Laws Ann. § 458c, for illegally carrying a firearm. Under the same facts, a federal grand jury indicted Mr. Sánchez del Valle of illegally trafficking in weapons and ammunition in interstate commerce. Specifically, he was accused of violating 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(a)(1)(A), 923(a), 924(a)(1)(D) and 2. In contrast to the state court, he was not changed with the offense of illegally carrying weapons. Eventually, the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico sentenced Mr. Sánchez del Valle to five [CERTIFIED TRANSLATION] 3a months of prison, five months of house arrest and three years of supervised release. In light of that, Mr. Sánchez del Valle filed a motion to dismiss with the Court of First Instance, Carolina Part, alleging that, pursuant to the constitutional protection against double jeopardy, he could not be prosecuted in Puerto Rico for the same offenses for which he had been found guilty in federal court. For its part, the prosecution argued that, according to the ruling in Pueblo v. Castro García, supra, the United States and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (the “Commonwealth”) derive their authority from different sources and both have the power to punish offenses without infringing the constitutional safeguard against double jeopardy. The Court of First Instance dismissed the accusations filed against Mr. Sánchez del Valle. It held that Mr. Sánchez del Valle could not be indicted twice for the same offenses and before the same sovereign entity. According to the Court of First Instance, Puerto Rico is not a different and separate jurisdiction from the United States inasmuch as the sovereignty of both arises from the same source, to wit, the United States Congress. It concluded that, given the federal court ruling, the indictments filed in state court violated the constitutional protection against double jeopardy. Not satisfied, the prosecution turned to the Court of Appeals. [CERTIFIED TRANSLATION] 4a B. CC-2013-0072 On September 28, 2008, the prosecution filed three charges against Mr. Jaime Gómez Vázquez for offenses related to the previous case, accusing him of: 1) a violation of Article 5.01 of the Puerto Rico Weapons Act, 25 P.R. Laws Ann. § 458, for illegally selling and transferring a firearm; 2) a violation of Article 5.07 of the Puerto Rico Weapons Act, 25 P.R. Laws Ann. § 458f, for carrying a riffle; and 3) a violation of Article 5.10 of the Puerto Rico Weapons Act, 25 P.R. Laws Ann. § 458i, for transferring a mutilated weapon. On that same date, a finding of probable cause was made in his absence, a warrant was issued for his arrest and bail was set at $325,000. Subsequently, before the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico, a grand jury filed five charges against Mr. Gómez Vázquez, Mr. Gómez Pastrana, Mr. Delgado Rodríguez and Mr. Rodríguez Betancourt for the same offenses for which they had been prosecuted in state court.1 Specifically, Mr. Gómez Vázquez was accused of violating the following statutes: 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(a)(1)(A), 923(a), 924(a)(1)(D), for the illegal sale of weapons in interstate commerce. In contrast to the state court, he was not charged with illegally carrying long weapons or of weapon mutilation. 1 There is no question that the charges are for the same offenses. Appendix, at 205 and 214. [CERTIFIED TRANSLATION] 5a In March of 2010, Mr. Gómez Vázquez filed a plea bargain with the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico whereby he pleaded guilty of the charges filed against him. Appendix, at 205. On June 26, 2010, the federal court sentenced him to 18 months of prison and 3 years of supervised release. On August 27, 2010, Mr. Gómez Vázquez filed with the Court of First Instance, Superior Court, Carolina Part, a motion to dismiss under Rule 64(e) of the Rules of Criminal Procedure, 34 P.R. Laws Ann. Ap. II. He claimed that the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and Section 11 of Article 11 of the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, P.R. Laws Ann., Volume I, protected him from being prosecuted in the Puerto Rico courts after being charged for the same offenses. Essentially, Mr. Gómez Vázquez argued that the United States and Puerto Rico were the same sovereign within the meaning of said constitutional clause and, therefore, could not submit him to two separate criminal prosecutions for the same offense or behavior. In other words, he argued that the exception to the constitutional protection against double jeopardy, known as the doctrine of “dual sovereignty,” did not apply to Puerto Rico. In response, the prosecution argued that, under this Court’s holding in Pueblo v. Castro García, supra, conduct constituting an offense both in federal court and in state court could be penalized separately in both jurisdictions without violating the constitutional clause against double jeopardy or [CERTIFIED TRANSLATION] 6a implying multiple punishments for the same conduct or behavior. The prosecution argued that the sovereignty of the United States and the sovereignty of Puerto Rico were separate and different for purposes of the referenced constitutional clause. Thus, it stated that Mr. Gómez Vázquez could be tried in the Puerto Rico courts for the same offenses for which he was sentenced in federal court. In a June 26, 2012 decision, the trial court granted the motion to dismiss filed by Mr. Gómez Vázquez. It ruled that the sovereignty or source of power of Puerto Rico to criminally prosecute its citizens resided and emanated from the federal government through Congress and that, for that reason, the doctrine of “dual sovereignty” did not apply. It concluded that the charges filed against Mr. Gómez Vázquez violated the constitutional protection against double jeopardy provided by the Constitution of the United States and the Puerto Rico Constitution. Not satisfied, the prosecution turned to the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals consolidated the cases described above and reversed the trial court’s rulings. It ruled that, under current law, a person could be submitted to criminal prosecution both in federal court and in state court for the same criminal behavior without violating the constitutional safeguard against double jeopardy. Judge González Vargas issued a dissenting vote and Judge Medina Monteserín issued a concurring vote. Not satisfied with the decision, Mr. Sánchez del Valle and Mr. Gómez Vázquez filed separate [CERTIFIED TRANSLATION] 7a petitions before this Court. We issued the writs of certiorari and, because they raise the same controversy, we consolidated them. With the benefit of the appearance of all the parties involved, we hereby decide. II The constitutional safeguard against double jeopardy protects every person charged with an offense by guaranteeing that he or she will not be “placed at risk of being punished twice for the same offense.” P.R. Const. Art. II § 10, P.R. Laws Ann., Vol. 1. See Pueblo v. Santos Santos, 189 P.R. Dec. 361 (2013). Likewise, the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States establishes that “no person may be submitted to trial twice for the same offense.”2 U.S. Const. amend. V, P.R. Laws Ann., Vol. 1. See Pueblo v. Santiago, 160 P.R. Dec. 618 (2003); Pueblo v. Martínez Torres, 126 P.R. Dec. 561 (1990); Ohio v. Johnson, 467 U.S. 493 (1984); E.L. Chiesa Aponte, Derecho Procesal Penal de Puerto Rico y Estados Unidos, Colombia, Ed. Forum, 1992, Vol. II § 16.1 (B), at 354. For the constitutional protection against double jeopardy to apply, several requirements must be met. Pueblo v. Santos Santos, supra, at 367. First of all, the proceedings held against the accused must be criminal in nature. Pueblo v. Santiago, supra, at 2 The original text in English reads: “nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb.” [CERTIFIED TRANSLATION] 8a 628. It is necessary, also, for a first trial to have been initiated or held under a valid indictment and in a court with jurisdiction.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cancel Culture: Posthuman Hauntologies in Digital Rhetoric and the Latent Values of Virtual Community Networks
    CANCEL CULTURE: POSTHUMAN HAUNTOLOGIES IN DIGITAL RHETORIC AND THE LATENT VALUES OF VIRTUAL COMMUNITY NETWORKS By Austin Michael Hooks Heather Palmer Rik Hunter Associate Professor of English Associate Professor of English (Chair) (Committee Member) Matthew Guy Associate Professor of English (Committee Member) CANCEL CULTURE: POSTHUMAN HAUNTOLOGIES IN DIGITAL RHETORIC AND THE LATENT VALUES OF VIRTUAL COMMUNITY NETWORKS By Austin Michael Hooks A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of the Degree of Master of English The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga Chattanooga, Tennessee August 2020 ii Copyright © 2020 By Austin Michael Hooks All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT This study explores how modern epideictic practices enact latent community values by analyzing modern call-out culture, a form of public shaming that aims to hold individuals responsible for perceived politically incorrect behavior via social media, and cancel culture, a boycott of such behavior and a variant of call-out culture. As a result, this thesis is mainly concerned with the capacity of words, iterated within the archive of social media, to haunt us— both culturally and informatically. Through hauntology, this study hopes to understand a modern discourse community that is bound by an epideictic framework that specializes in the deconstruction of the individual’s ethos via the constant demonization and incitement of past, current, and possible social media expressions. The primary goal of this study is to understand how these practices function within a capitalistic framework and mirror the performativity of capital by reducing affective human interactions to that of a transaction.
    [Show full text]
  • 15-108 Puerto Rico V. Sanchez Valle (06/09/2016)
    (Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2015 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO v. SANCHEZ VALLE ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF PUERTO RICO No. 15–108. Argued January 13, 2016—Decided June 9, 2016 Respondents Luis Sánchez Valle and Jaime Gómez Vázquez each sold a gun to an undercover police officer. Puerto Rican prosecutors indict­ ed them for illegally selling firearms in violation of the Puerto Rico Arms Act of 2000. While those charges were pending, federal grand juries also indicted them, based on the same transactions, for viola­ tions of analogous U. S. gun trafficking statutes. Both defendants pleaded guilty to the federal charges and moved to dismiss the pend­ ing Commonwealth charges on double jeopardy grounds. The trial court in each case dismissed the charges, rejecting prosecutors’ ar­ guments that Puerto Rico and the United States are separate sover­ eigns for double jeopardy purposes and so could bring successive prosecutions against each defendant. The Puerto Rico Court of Ap­ peals consolidated the cases and reversed. The Supreme Court of Puerto Rico granted review and held, in line with the trial court, that Puerto Rico’s gun sale prosecutions violated the Double Jeopardy Clause.
    [Show full text]
  • Abstract Since 2016, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico Has Experienced a Period of Political Challenges Along with a Severe Economic Austerity
    Revista [IN]Genios, Vol. 7, Núm. 1, pp.1-16 (diciembre, 2020) ISSN#: 2374-2747 Universidad de Puerto Rico, Río Piedras © 2020, Copyright. Todos los derechos están reservados. ISLAND ARTSCAPE OF BANKRUPTCY: A NARRATIVE PHOTO-ESSAY OF SAN JUAN’S POLITICAL STREET ART OF RESISTANCE Medio: Fotografía Andrea D. Rivera Martínez Departamento de Psicología Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, UPR RP Recibido: 15/09/2020; Revisado: 16/11/2020; Aceptado: 29/11/2020 Abstract Since 2016, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico has experienced a period of political challenges along with a severe economic austerity. Given the unpromising projections, voices of resistance, anger, frustration, uncertainty, and hope are becoming increasingly visible on the island’s cities’ walls and spaces. Thus, based on the current situation of fiscal crisis, this visual essay narrates and documents the continuum of interpretations and opinions regarding the Puerto Rico Oversight, Management, and Economic Stability Act (PROMESA) inscribed in the urban fabric over the past five years from now. Keywords: street art, bankruptcy, fiscal crisis, austerity, Puerto Rico Resumen Desde el 2016, el Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico experimenta un período de desafíos políticos junto con una severa austeridad económica. Dadas las proyecciones, las voces de resistencia, ira, frustración, incertidumbre y esperanza son cada vez más visibles en las paredes y espacios de las ciudades de la isla. Por tanto, dada la situación actual de crisis fiscal, este ensayo visual narra y documenta el continuo de interpretaciones y opiniones sobre la Ley de Supervisión, Gestión y Estabilidad Económica de Puerto Rico (PROMESA) inscritas en el tejido urbano durante los últimos cinco años.
    [Show full text]
  • Not the King's Bench Edward A
    University of Minnesota Law School Scholarship Repository Constitutional Commentary 2003 Not the King's Bench Edward A. Hartnett Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/concomm Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Hartnett, Edward A., "Not the King's Bench" (2003). Constitutional Commentary. 303. https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/concomm/303 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the University of Minnesota Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Constitutional Commentary collection by an authorized administrator of the Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. NOT THE KING'S BENCH Edward A. Hartnett* Speaking at a public birthday party for an icon, even if the honoree is one or two hundred years old, can be a surprisingly tricky business. Short of turning the party into a roast, it seems rude to criticize the birthday boy too harshly. On the other hand, it is at least as important to avoid unwarranted and exaggerated praise.1 The difficult task, then, is to try to say something re­ motely new or interesting while navigating that strait. The conference organizers did make it easier for me in one respect: My assignment does not involve those ideas for which Marbury is invoked as an icon. It is for others to wrestle in well­ worn trenches with exalted arguments about judicial review and its overgrown descendent judicial supremacy, while trying to avoid unseemly criticism or fawning praise. I, on the other hand, am to address more technical issues involving section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 and its provision granting the Supreme Court the power to issue writs of mandamus.
    [Show full text]
  • Extradition Law at the Crossroads: the Trend Toward Extending Greater Constitutional Procedural Protections to Fugitives Fighting Extradition from the United States
    Michigan Journal of International Law Volume 19 Issue 3 1998 Extradition Law at the Crossroads: The Trend Toward Extending Greater Constitutional Procedural Protections to Fugitives Fighting Extradition from the United States Lis Wiehl University of Washington Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjil Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, Criminal Law Commons, and the Evidence Commons Recommended Citation Lis Wiehl, Extradition Law at the Crossroads: The Trend Toward Extending Greater Constitutional Procedural Protections to Fugitives Fighting Extradition from the United States, 19 MICH. J. INT'L L. 729 (1998). Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjil/vol19/iss3/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Michigan Journal of International Law at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Michigan Journal of International Law by an authorized editor of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. EXTRADITION LAW AT THE CROSSROADS: THE TREND TOWARD EXTENDING GREATER CONSTITUTIONAL PROCEDURAL PROTECTIONS TO FUGITIVES FIGHTING EXTRADITION FROM THE UNITED STATES Lis Wiehl* PROLOGUE ............................................................................................. 730 INTRODUCrION ................... ....................... 730 I. BACKGROUND: THE LIMITED NATURE OF CONSTITUTIONAL PROCEDURAL PROTECTIONS IN THE U.S. LAW OF INTERNATIONAL EXTRADITION
    [Show full text]
  • Puerto Rico | Miami | New York 1 PUT AMERICA FIRST!
    Washington | Puerto Rico | Miami | New York 1 PUT AMERICA FIRST! THE MINORITY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ANNOUNCES: THE PUERTO RICO HUB ECONOMIC RECONTRUCTION CENTER COMING UP JANUARY 26, 2019 and partners, mayors of Puerto Rican mu- Grow your way to Puerto Rico Reconstruc- nicipalities, businesses, and advocates all tion with a prestigious address for your joining together to support the resurgence presence in the island, a dedicated local of the local economy and Puerto Rico’s receptionist to answer and handle calls growth goals. The following services will be as you instruct, ability to change your re- available for our members: ceptionist’s instructions immediately at any time, access to 5-star meeting and confer- 18 Years is Hospitality Program: The goal of the pro- encing facilities when you need them 24 gram is support U.S Companies and busi- hours – 7 days with a professional support Coming at ness organizations to further enhance the team to look after your administrative tasks. the Minority abilities of Puerto Rico to provide first-class Chamber of service to their visitors with local transpor- Event Planner Coordination: We offers a tation, security, house-apartment or hotel. variety of planning and coordination ser- Commerce The Chamber aims to achieve this by be- vices to make any event a success. We are Doug Mayorga ing a resource for industry-specific coor- able to assist any Chamber in U.S, Indus- Publisher & President dination to create jobs through hiring local try, Company, Professionals, Government [email protected] drivers and hundreds of residential –high and Philanthropic Organization with events 202.250.0260 level- available for our members.
    [Show full text]
  • Commandeering Under the Treaty Power
    NOTES COMMANDEERING UNDER THE TREATY POWER JANET R. CARTER* In this Note, Janet Carter argues that the anticommandeeringprinciple announced in Printz v. United States should not constrain congressional implementation of treaty obligations. The Printz Court struck the balance between federal goals and states' rights knowing that Congress had alternative means of achieving its ends: the spending power and the threat of conditionalpreemption. Carter argues that those alternative means are largely unavailable,or at least less likely to work, when Congress is seeking to implement a treaty obligation. Therefore, the Printz Court's federal/state compromise will weigh too heavily againstfederal interests if applied to treaty-implementingprograms, suggesting that an absolute prohibitionon federal commandeeringpursuant to the treaty power is inappropriate. INTRODUCTION The powers of Congress, limited to those enumerated in the Con- stitution, are constrained further by the Tenth Amendment' and the general principles of federalism it embodies.2 However, in Missouri v. Holland,3 the Supreme Court held that federalism does not constrain * I would like to thank Professor Christopher Eisgruber for his generous guidance and advice, and Professors Barry Friedman and David Golove for their helpful comments. Thanks also to my wonderful editor Maggie Lemos, and to Paul Hayes, Alex Reid, Sally Kesh, and David Karp. 1 U.S. Const. amend. X ("The powers not delegated to the United States by the Con- stitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."). 2 According to current Supreme Court jurisprudence, that is. See Printz v. United States, 521 U.S. 898 (1997) (holding that federal government may not commandeer state executive); New York v.
    [Show full text]
  • Puerto Rico Democracy Act of 2007
    110TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! 2d Session HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 110–597 PUERTO RICO DEMOCRACY ACT OF 2007 APRIL 22, 2008.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed Mr. RAHALL, from the Committee on Natural Resources, submitted the following R E P O R T together with ADDITIONAL VIEWS [To accompany H.R. 900] [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred the bill (H.R. 900) to provide for a federally sanctioned self-determina- tion process for the people of Puerto Rico, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with an amendment and rec- ommend that the bill as amended do pass. The amendment is as follows: Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following: SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Puerto Rico Democracy Act of 2007’’. SEC. 2. PUERTO RICAN DECISION ON PRESENT STATUS. (a) PLEBISCITE.—The Puerto Rico State Elections Commission shall conduct a plebiscite in Puerto Rico not later than December 31, 2009. The two options set forth on the ballot shall be preceded by the following statement: Instructions: Mark one of the following two options: (1) Puerto Rico should continue to have its present form of territorial status and relationship with the United States. If you agree, mark here llllllllll. (2) Puerto Rico should pursue a constitutionally-viable permanent non-terri- torial status. If you agree, mark here llllllllll. (b) RECOMMENDATONS.—If a majority of the validly-cast
    [Show full text]
  • Puerto Rico (8)” of the James M
    The original documents are located in Box 28, folder “Puerto Rico (8)” of the James M. Cannon Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Copyright Notice The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald Ford donated to the United States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections. Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Digitized from Box 28 of the James M. Cannon Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON June 10, l~ MEMORANDUM FOR: JI N JI CA NAUGH FROM: STEVE McCONAHEY ~ SUBJECT: Puerto Rico Visit On Tuesday and Wednesday I met with the current Governor of Puerto Rico, Rafael Hernandez-Colon, the current Mayor of San Juan, Carlos Romero Barcelo, and the former Governor of Puerto Rico Luis Ferre. The purpose of my visit was to brief these officials on the nature and status of the Economic Summit Conference plans, solicit their ideas and suggestions regarding the Conference planninq and to qain their aqree­ ment on minimizinq the domestic political rhetoric and debate that has surfaced recently -- largely because of the Puerto Rican compact and because the Governor and Mayor will be opposing one another in November for the Governorship.
    [Show full text]
  • The Constitutional Theory of the Fourth Amendment, 38 Depaul L
    Notre Dame Law School NDLScholarship Journal Articles Publications 1989 The onsC titutional Theory of the Fourth Amendment Gerard V. Bradley Notre Dame Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, Fourth Amendment Commons, and the Legal History Commons Recommended Citation Gerard V. Bradley, The Constitutional Theory of the Fourth Amendment, 38 DePaul L. Rev. 817 (1988-1989). Available at: https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship/773 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Publications at NDLScholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal Articles by an authorized administrator of NDLScholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE CONSTITUTIONAL THEORY OF THE FOURTH AMENDMENT Gerard V. Bradley* INTRODUCTION We presently inhabit a "judicialized" regime of search and seizure. The "reasonableness clause" of the fourth amendment is universally understood to require a "common law of search and seizure," 1 yet one of constitutional stature. That is, it binds the states and cannot be undone by ordinary legislation. The purpose of this Article is to demonstrate that this near universal interpretation of the fourth amendment is unfounded. Indeed, it will be argued that the current view is contrary to the plain meaning of the fourth amendment, as historically recovered, and is inconsistent with the basic constitutional structure. Instead, the reasonableness clause, properly understood, does not authorize courts to do anything, but exists to affirm legislative supremacy over the law of search and seizure. Accordingly, the only judicially operative portion of the amendment is the "warrant clause." This interpretation can and should be installed as the operative premise of the fourth amendment.
    [Show full text]
  • Senado De Puerto Rico Diario De Sesiones Procedimientos Y Debates De La Decimosexta Asamblea Legislativa Primera Sesion Ordinaria Año 2009 Vol
    SENADO DE PUERTO RICO DIARIO DE SESIONES PROCEDIMIENTOS Y DEBATES DE LA DECIMOSEXTA ASAMBLEA LEGISLATIVA PRIMERA SESION ORDINARIA AÑO 2009 VOL. LVII San Juan, Puerto Rico Lunes, 16 de marzo de 2009 Núm. 20 A la una y diecisiete minutos de la tarde (1:17 p.m.) de este día, lunes, 16 de marzo de 2009, el Senado reanuda sus trabajos bajo la Presidencia de la señora Margarita Nolasco Santiago, Vicepresidenta. ASISTENCIA Senadores: Roberto A. Arango Vinent, Luis A. Berdiel Rivera, Eduardo Bhatia Gautier, José Ramón Díaz Hernández, Alejandro García Padilla, José E. González Velázquez, Angel Martínez Santiago, Migdalia Padilla Alvelo, Itzamar Peña Ramírez, Kimmey Raschke Martínez, Carmelo J. Ríos Santiago, Thomas Rivera Schatz, Luz M. Santiago González, Lawrence Seilhamer Rodríguez, Antonio Soto Díaz, Cirilo Tirado Rivera, Carlos Javier Torres Torres y Margarita Nolasco Santiago, Vicepresidenta. SRA. VICEPRESIDENTA: Habiendo quórum, se inician los trabajos del Senado de Puerto Rico, hoy lunes, 16 de marzo de 2009. (Se hace constar que después del Pase de Lista Inicial entraron a la Sala de Sesiones: las señoras Luz Z. Arce Ferrer, Norma E. Burgos Andújar; los señores José L. Dalmau Santiago, Antonio J. Fas Alzamora; la señora Sila María González Calderón; los señores Juan E. Hernández Mayoral, Héctor Martínez Maldonado, Luis D. Muñiz Cortés, Eder E. Ortiz Ortiz; las señoras Lornna Soto Villanueva y Evelyn Vázquez Nieves). INVOCACION El Reverendo Adolfo Santana y el Padre Efraín López Sánchez, miembros del Cuerpo de Capellanes del Senado de Puerto Rico, proceden con la Invocación. REVERENDO SANTANA: Oramos. Señor, queremos comenzar esta semana dándote muchas gracias por la vida que nos regalas.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Conference of Mayors the UNITED STATES CONFERENCE of MAYORS
    MAYORS A PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN MAJOR LEAGUE BASEball AND THE UNITED STATES CONFERENCE OF MAYORS THE UNITED STATES CONFERENCE OF MAYORS Mitchell J. Landrieu Mayor of New Orleans President Stephen K. Benjamin Mayor of Columbia Vice President Bryan K. Barnett Mayor of Rochester Hills Second Vice President Tom Cochran CEO and Executive Director The U.S. Conference of Mayors is the official nonpartisan organization of cities with populations of 30,000 or more. There are 1,393 such cities in the country today, each represented in the Conference by its chief elected official, the Mayor. Printed on Recycled Paper. do your part! please recycle! 2017 is the third year of The United States Conference of Mayors and Major League Baseball (MLB) Play Ball Summer Campaign. This year mayors in the United States and Puerto Rico hosted “PLAY BALL” -themed, youth-focused events in communities from June through August 2017. Play Ball is a joint program from MLB and USA Baseball that focuses on the fun nature of baseball and encourages widespread participation in baseball-related activities. A primary goal of the Play Ball Summer Initiative is to reach kids who don’t normally play baseball. Building on the success of previous years, this year - over 255 mayors pledged to host Play Ball events in cities. Mayors were encouraged to engage youth, citizens, families, and city departments to organize community Play Ball events. From June to August mayors across the country hosted activities such as: baseball/ softball themed clinic days for park and recreation summer camps, playing lunchtime catch games outside of city hall, hosting pitch, hit and run clinics with Little Leagues, showcasing the pastime at the local international festival, as well as hosting baseball themed movie nights with pre-movie baseball drills that engaged families.
    [Show full text]