DOCSLIB.ORG

Criminal Arraignment 4Th Floor Charlotte County

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

JUDGE: AMY R HAWTHORNE COURT DATE: 02/25/2013 9:00 am 4TH FLOOR CHARLOTTE COUNTY JUSTICE CENTER CRIMINAL ARRAIGNMENT PRINTED BY: Defendant(A-Z) SEQ DEFENDANT CASE NUMBER ARRESTED ATTORNEY 1 ALBRITTON, DODIE ALLYSON 13000006F 01/01/2013 CLOUGH, CASEY 2 ARMENIA, IGNATIUS JOHN 13000030F 01/07/2013 3 ARROYO, AERRICK KENYATTA 13000054F 01/13/2013 CLOUGH, CASEY 4 BAGGOTT, BRITTANY HOPE 13000031F 01/07/2013 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 5 BELL, JERMAINE LEON 12000220F 02/10/2012 DESISTO, MARK C 6 BENNETT, JASON RAY 13000121F 01/21/2013 7 BENNETT, TIQUISHA DEVONA 13000048F 01/11/2013 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 8 BENNING, CHRISTOPHER ERIC 13000064F 01/12/2013 9 BERNACIAK, DENNIS BENDICT 11001848F 10/02/2011 CARUTHERS, JANESE 10 BERRY, CRAIG FREDRICK 13000070F 01/16/2013 11 BOROCZKY, KEVIN PAUL 13000022F 01/04/2013 MCFARLANE, DONALD 12 BRISTOL, ANREKA SHANA 12002065F 12/23/2012 MCFARLANE, DONALD 13 BROOKS, SHERITA SHONTA 12002045F 12/20/2012 MCFARLANE, DONALD 14 BROWN, PHENEATHIUS SHARBRAIL 11001676F 09/04/2011 MCFARLANE, DONALD 15 BURLEW, RYAN LEIGH 13000009F 01/02/2013 16 CAMPBELL, TRAVIS 13000078F 01/16/2013 CLOUGH, CASEY 17 CASS, JOSHUA AARON 13000071F 01/15/2013 CLOUGH, CASEY 18 CENTANNE, SAMUEL ROSS 12002080F 12/26/2012 19 CHAPMAN, JASON ALAN 12001002F 06/17/2012 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 20 CHAVEZ, ALBERT CHRISTOPHER 12001930F 11/28/2012 DESISTO, MARK C 21 COLETTI, CARA NICOLE 11002288F 12/14/2011 WALLACE, DENNIS R 22 COOPER, JOHN TIMOTHY 13000119F 01/19/2013 23 CRUZ, YOENNY 13000015F 01/03/2013 CLOUGH, CASEY 24 DAMICO, AMANDA ROSE 12002071F 12/26/2012 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 25 DANFORTH, JENNIFER LYN 13000025F 01/06/2013 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 26 DAVIS, CHRISTOPHER C 13000103F 01/24/2013 KIRSHY, RUSSELL T 27 DAVIS, TERENCE DEVON 13000016F 01/04/2013 DEFENDER, PUBLIC JUDGE: AMY R HAWTHORNE COURT DATE: 02/25/2013 9:00 am 4TH FLOOR CHARLOTTE COUNTY JUSTICE CENTER CRIMINAL ARRAIGNMENT PRINTED BY: Defendant(A-Z) SEQ DEFENDANT CASE NUMBER ARRESTED ATTORNEY 28 DAVIS, TERRY WAYNE JR 13000066F 01/15/2013 KOLODY, RICHARD A 29 DECKER, KRISTIN RUTH 12000797F 05/17/2012 KOLODY, RICHARD A 30 DELCIN, REGINALD 12001322F 08/10/2012 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 31 DESROSIERS, DANIEL JAMES 13000144F 01/23/2013 POWELL, MICHAEL G 32 DIAL, CHRISTEN JOY 12002090F 12/29/2012 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 13000005F 01/01/2013 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 33 DIDONATO, MATTHEW DAVID 11001124F 06/07/2011 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 34 DOMINGUEZ, JULIO ESQUIVEL 12000576O 12/27/2012 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 35 DOYLE, NICHOLAS ANDREW 12002070F 12/26/2012 FLAHERTY, ANGELA D 36 DRAKE, BRANDI LYNN 13000098F 01/18/2013 37 DUNCAN, SHIRLEY ANN 13000106F 01/24/2013 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 38 DURAN, ISMAEL 13000037F 01/08/2013 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 39 DWYER, KATHLEEN 13000142F 01/19/2013 40 EDWARDS, JUSTIN LEE 12000392F 03/11/2012 RUHL, RICHARD 12000894F 05/27/2012 RUHL, RICHARD 41 EDWARDS, MICHAEL CHE 11001722F 09/12/2011 WEINBERG, SCOTT 42 ELLEN, TAMIKO LATOYA 12002075F 12/27/2012 43 ELLINGSWORTH, JAMES WAYNE 13000089F 01/22/2013 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 44 EPTING, RYAN LASHON 12001928F 11/27/2012 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 45 ERICKSON, MARK ALLAN 13000107F 01/24/2013 LESKOVICH, STEVEN S 46 FARLEY, WILLIAM WYTHE 12002066F 12/24/2012 LESKOVICH, STEVEN S 47 FELL, CHRISTOPHER ALLEN 12001435F 09/06/2012 WALLACE, DENNIS R 48 FERNANDEZ ALFONSO, EDUARDO 13000012F 01/02/2013 49 FERNANDEZ, ALEXEY 13000011F 01/02/2013 KOLODY, RICHARD A 50 FERNANDEZ, JOSE LUIS 11000662F 04/05/2011 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 51 FIGUEREDO, GUSTAVO MODESTO 13000014F 01/03/2013 KOLODY, RICHARD A 52 FISHER, SABRINA LEE 13000065F 01/15/2013 KOLODY, RICHARD A 53 FLEMMING, XAVIER RACHAUD 12002094F 12/30/2012 REGIONAL, COUNSEL JUDGE: AMY R HAWTHORNE COURT DATE: 02/25/2013 9:00 am 4TH FLOOR CHARLOTTE COUNTY JUSTICE CENTER CRIMINAL ARRAIGNMENT PRINTED BY: Defendant(A-Z) SEQ DEFENDANT CASE NUMBER ARRESTED ATTORNEY 12002095F 12/30/2012 REGIONAL, COUNSEL 54 FOIST, RICHARD ALLEN 13000052F 01/13/2013 13000053F 01/12/2013 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 55 FOLEY, WILLIAM PAUL 12001916F 11/25/2012 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 56 FRASER, NADINE CYNTHIA 10001920F 11/08/2010 CORDELL, SPENCER A 57 FREDERICK, NATHANIEL J 12002081F 12/27/2012 LESKOVICH, STEVEN S 58 GAURA, NATHANIEL LEE 13000143F 01/23/2013 59 GLYNN, RENE MARIE 13000059F 01/15/2013 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 60 GODBEY, RYAN ANDREW 13000024F 01/05/2013 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 61 GOFORTH, TONY 12001914F 11/26/2012 KOLODY, RICHARD A 13000118F 01/24/2013 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 62 GOMEZ, ROLANDO ENRIQUE JR 13000058F 01/12/2013 63 GORDON, CODY MICHAEL 12000637F 04/16/2012 KIRSHY, RUSSELL T 12002096F 12/30/2012 13000159F 01/24/2013 LESKOVICH, STEVEN S 64 GREENE, PAUL EGGERS 13000007F 01/01/2013 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 65 GREGOIRE, STEPHEN JOSPEH 12002091F 12/29/2012 KOLODY, RICHARD A 66 HAGERMAN, CAROL ANN 11001082F 06/02/2011 MCFARLANE, DONALD 67 HAINES, GARY ROBERT 12002102F 12/30/2012 FITZGERALD, TIMOTHY J 68 HALEY, KIMBERLY ANN 13000155F 01/25/2013 LESKOVICH, STEVEN S 69 HALL, GEOFFREY TANNER 13000017F 01/04/2013 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 70 HALLMAN, CHRISTOPHER GLEN 12002061F 12/21/2012 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 71 HANDY, KIM MARIE 09001408F 09/07/2009 BURCH, STEVEN P 72 HARRINGTON, RICHARD ROBERT 13000156F 01/26/2013 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 73 HARRIS, GABRIELLA C 12001961F 12/05/2012 PRICE, REGIONAL COUNSEL, PINE 74 HEMPHILL, KAYLA ANN 11000646F 04/01/2011 MCFARLANE, DONALD 75 HERNANDEZ, ANTONIO 11001950F 10/16/2011 76 HIMME, MICHAEL SHERWIN 13000094F 01/22/2013 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 77 HOLLY, NOVA MARIE JUDGE: AMY R HAWTHORNE COURT DATE: 02/25/2013 9:00 am 4TH FLOOR CHARLOTTE COUNTY JUSTICE CENTER CRIMINAL ARRAIGNMENT PRINTED BY: Defendant(A-Z) SEQ DEFENDANT CASE NUMBER ARRESTED ATTORNEY 08001148F 10/02/2008 78 HORNER, WILLIAM RAY 12001701F 10/15/2012 ABDULNOUR, BENJAMIN 79 HOXSIE, JASON F 11000244F 02/27/2012 80 HUDSON, SHANE PATRICK 12002076F 01/09/2013 ABDULNOUR, BENJAMIN 81 JACQUES, MARC RONALD 12001486F 09/13/2012 ABDULNOUR, BENJAMIN 82 JANNUZZI, ANDREA LYNN 12002089F 12/29/2012 ABDULNOUR, BENJAMIN 83 JEAN PIERRE, BRINA DAWN 11001548F 08/19/2011 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 84 JENKINS, CHACHI LAVELLE 13000083F 01/18/2013 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 85 JOHNS, TAMMY LYNN 11000356F 02/20/2011 POWELL, MICHAEL G 86 JOINER, JAMES TRAVIS 12002067F 12/25/2012 SMITH, SAWYER 87 JONES, KAME PATRICE 12001968F 12/05/2012 PETROVA, PAVLINA 88 JONES, KYLE ANTHONY 12001512F 09/14/2012 BURCH, STEVEN P 89 JONES, MICHAEL LAVELL 12001782F 10/29/2012 ABDULNOUR, BENJAMIN 90 KEENE, BOBBIE JO 13000061F 01/11/2013 91 KELLEY, JOSHUA WILLIAM 12002103F 12/30/2012 ABDULNOUR, BENJAMIN 92 KELLY, RAYMOND DAVID 13000146F 01/23/2013 ABDULNOUR, BENJAMIN 93 KENNY, CHRISTOPHER BRYAN 13000019F 01/03/2013 PRIOR, DOUGLAS 94 KERLEY, SHARON ANN 13000095F 01/22/2013 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 95 KINER, MICHAEL DWAINE 08001825F 01/25/2013 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 96 KLOTZBIER, JANET NICOLE 13000044F 01/10/2013 97 KOPYCINSKI, JAMES RAY MITCHELL 11002015F 10/30/2011 ABDULNOUR, BENJAMIN 98 KURKOWSKI, JAMES ALAN 13000032F 01/08/2013 ABDULNOUR, BENJAMIN 99 LATORTUE, GARY LUCKNER 12002020F 12/14/2012 100 LAVIGNE, STEPHEN THOMAS 13000157F 01/24/2013 101 LISKOW, WAYNE HOWARD 12001708F 10/16/2012 BURCH, STEVEN P 102 LOUISSAINT, EDWIN 13000108F 01/25/2013 DEFENDER, PUBLIC 103 MOON, JULIE MARIE 12000715F 04/30/2012 DEFENDER, PUBLIC JUDGE: AMY R HAWTHORNE Run: 02/13/2013 COURT DATE: 02/25/2013 9:00 am Page: 1 4TH FLOOR CHARLOTTE COUNTY JUSTICE CENTER CRIMINAL ARRAIGNMENT WAIVE ARR ARR ATTORNEY AND DEFENDANT CASE NUMBER BOND-AMT SP.TRIAL DATE + 175 DISPOSITION 1 ALBRITTON, DODIE ALLYSON 1 CRIMINAL ARRAIGNMENT 13000006F No 01/01/13 06/25/13 Def: CLOUGH, CASEY 9:00 am Pros OCA# 1212017966 01/16/13 FILED 1 TRAFFICK IN METH/AMPHETAMINE 14 GRAMS OR MORE OCA# 1212017966 01/16/13 FILED 2 POSSESS CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE W/O PRESCRIPTION OCA# 1212017966 01/16/13 FILED 3 USE OR POSSESS DRUG PARAPHERNALIA OCA# 1212017966 DROPPED/ABANDONED 4 CRUELTY TOWARD CHILD ABUSE WITHOUT GREAT HARM (NO FILE) PD Fee: $50.00 INFO FILED - COMPLEX WRITTEN PLEA NG 1 DOB: 01/02/1992 COUNTY JAIL 2 ARMENIA, IGNATIUS JOHN 1 CRIMINAL ARRAIGNMENT 13000030F No 01/07/13 07/01/13 Def: 9:00 am Pros HEDVICEK, MARTINA OCA# 1301003831 02/06/13 FILED 1 BATTERY ON PERSON 65 YOA OR OLDER $2,000.00 $2,000.00 PD Fee: $50.00 INFO FILED - EXPEDITED 1 DOB: 03/13/1950 NOT IN CUSTODY PRINTED BY: Defendant(A-Z) #123 V1 09/06/2012 JUDGE: AMY R HAWTHORNE Run: 02/13/2013 COURT DATE: 02/25/2013 9:00 am Page: 2 4TH FLOOR CHARLOTTE COUNTY JUSTICE CENTER CRIMINAL ARRAIGNMENT WAIVE ARR ARR ATTORNEY AND DEFENDANT CASE NUMBER BOND-AMT SP.TRIAL DATE + 175 DISPOSITION 3 ARROYO, AERRICK KENYATTA 1 CRIMINAL ARRAIGNMENT 13000054F No 01/13/13 07/07/13 Def: CLOUGH, CASEY 9:00 am Pros POWERS, STEPHANIE OCA# 1212003884 02/01/13 FILED 1 FRAUDULENT USE OF CREDIT CARD PD Fee: $50.00 INFO FILED - EXPEDITED WRITTEN PLEA NG 1 DOB: 04/01/1992 COUNTY JAIL 4 BAGGOTT, BRITTANY HOPE 1 CRIMINAL ARRAIGNMENT 13000031F No 01/07/13 07/01/13 Def: DEFENDER, PUBLIC 9:00 am Pros OCA# 1301003832 DROPPED/ABANDONED 1 AGGRAVATED BATTERY DEADLY WEAPON (NO FILE) OCA# 1301003832 01/25/13 FILED 2 POSSESS NEW LEGEND DRUG WO PRESCRIPTION PD Fee: $50.00 WRITTEN PLEA NG 1 DOB: 05/25/1989 COUNTY JAIL 5 BELL, JERMAINE LEON PRINTED BY: Defendant(A-Z) #123 V1 09/06/2012 JUDGE: AMY R HAWTHORNE Run: 02/13/2013 COURT DATE: 02/25/2013 9:00 am Page: 3 4TH FLOOR CHARLOTTE COUNTY JUSTICE CENTER CRIMINAL ARRAIGNMENT WAIVE ARR ARR ATTORNEY AND DEFENDANT CASE NUMBER BOND-AMT SP.TRIAL DATE + 175 DISPOSITION 5 BELL, JERMAINE LEON - - - Continued - - - 1 CRIMINAL ARRAIGNMENT 12000220F Yes 02/10/12 08/03/12 Def: DESISTO, MARK C 9:00 am Pros OCA# 1202005302 02/21/12 FILED 1 BATTERY TOUCH OR STRIKE VOP OCA# 72432004 ReArrest Date 01/02/2013 VOP/VOCC PD Fee: $50.00 INFO FILED - EXPEDITED
Recommended publications
  • A Federal Criminal Case Timeline

    A Federal Criminal Case Timeline

    A Federal Criminal Case Timeline The following timeline is a very broad overview of the progress of a federal felony case. Many variables can change the speed or course of the case, including settlement negotiations and changes in law. This timeline, however, will hold true in the majority of federal felony cases in the Eastern District of Virginia. Initial appearance: Felony defendants are usually brought to federal court in the custody of federal agents. Usually, the charges against the defendant are in a criminal complaint. The criminal complaint is accompanied by an affidavit that summarizes the evidence against the defendant. At the defendant's first appearance, a defendant appears before a federal magistrate judge. This magistrate judge will preside over the first two or three appearances, but the case will ultimately be referred to a federal district court judge (more on district judges below). The prosecutor appearing for the government is called an "Assistant United States Attorney," or "AUSA." There are no District Attorney's or "DAs" in federal court. The public defender is often called the Assistant Federal Public Defender, or an "AFPD." When a defendant first appears before a magistrate judge, he or she is informed of certain constitutional rights, such as the right to remain silent. The defendant is then asked if her or she can afford counsel. If a defendant cannot afford to hire counsel, he or she is instructed to fill out a financial affidavit. This affidavit is then submitted to the magistrate judge, and, if the defendant qualifies, a public defender or CJA panel counsel is appointed.
  • Legal Methods for the Suppression of Organized Crime (A Symposium) Arthur Buller

    Legal Methods for the Suppression of Organized Crime (A Symposium) Arthur Buller

    Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume 48 | Issue 4 Article 8 1958 Legal Methods for the Suppression of Organized Crime (A Symposium) Arthur Buller Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc Part of the Criminal Law Commons, Criminology Commons, and the Criminology and Criminal Justice Commons Recommended Citation Arthur Buller, Legal Methods for the Suppression of Organized Crime (A Symposium), 48 J. Crim. L. Criminology & Police Sci. 414 (1957-1958) This Criminal Law is brought to you for free and open access by Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology by an authorized editor of Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. CRIMINAt LAW CASE NOTES AND COMMENTS Prepared by students of Northwestern University School of Law, under the direction of the student members of the Law School's Journal Editorial Board. Arthur Buller, Editor-in-Chief Arthur Rollin, Associate Editor Marvin Aspen Jay Oliff Malcolm Gaynor Louis Sunderland Ronald Mora Howard Sweig LEGAL METHODS FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF ORGANIZED CRIME (A SYMPOSIUM) Organized crime is a vital problem in the "The Use of Equitable Devices to Suppress field of law enforcement. Because of the nature Organized Crime", will consider the mechanics of its various forms of activity, the suppression and availability of the use of the injunction and of organized crime presents difficulties not other equitable remedies where the usual legal ordinarily encountered in other areas of criminal remedies have proved inadequate. The fifth and conduct. In this and subsequent issues of the concluding paper, "Indirect Control of Organized Journal, a series of articles will examine these Crime Through Liquor License Revocation", will problems and the legal remedies available for examine this tactic as a substitute for direct their solution.
  • Jun a 1 Ioqy Marcia J

    Jun a 1 Ioqy Marcia J

    IN THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO STATE OF OHIO, Case No. 2007-0923 Plaintiff-Appellee, On Appeal from the Licking County Court of Appeals, V. Fifth Appellate District HAROLD T. BIESER, Court of Appeals Case No. 06 CA 00045 Defendant-Appellant. MEMORANDUM OF DEFENDANT-APPELLANT HAROLD T. BIESER IN SUPPORT OF JURISDICTION Tricia M. Klockner (0077414) John J. Kulewicz (0008376) Assistant Law Director (Counsel of Record) City of Newark Alexandra T. Schimmer (0075732) 40 West Main Street Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP Newark, Ohio 43055 52 East Gay Street (740) 349-6663 P.O. Box 1008 Columbus, Ohio 43216-1008 Attorney for Plaintiff-Appellee (614) 464-5634 State of Ohio (614) 719-4812 (Facsimile) [email protected] [email protected] Attorneys for Defendant-Appellant Harold T. Bieser JUN A 1 IOQY MARCIA J. MENGEL; CLERK SUPREME COURT OF OHIO TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. THIS CASE INVOLVES A SUBSTANTIAL CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION AND RAISES QUESTIONS OF PUBLIC OR GREAT GENERAL INTEREST .............1 II. STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND FACTS . ...................................................................4 III. ARGUMENT IN SUPPORT OF PROPOSITIONS OF LAW ...........................................7 PROPOSITION OF LAW NO. 1: The rule announced in State v. Broughton (1991), 62 Ohio St.3d 253, 581 N.E. 2d 541 -- that speedy-trial time ordinarily stops running in the interim between a nolle prosequi dismissal and refiling of the same charges -- does not apply where the defendant was not notified of the dismissal and the bond was retained after dismissal ...........................................................7 PROPOSITION OF LAW NO. 2: The State violates the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution, as well as Section 10, Article I, of the Ohio Constitution and the Ohio Speedy Trial Act (R.C.
  • SELECTED DECISIONS of the HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE Under the OPTIONAL PROTOCOL

    SELECTED DECISIONS of the HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE Under the OPTIONAL PROTOCOL

    OFFICE OF THE UNITED NATIONS HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS SELECTED DECISIONS OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE under THE OPTIONAL PROTOCOL Volume 7 Sixty-sixth to seventy-fourth sessions (July 1999 – March 2002) UNITED NATIONS New York and Geneva, 2006 NOTE Material contained in this publication may be freely quoted or reprinted, provided credit is given and a copy of the publication containing the reprinted material is sent to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Palais des Nations, 8-14 avenue de la Paix, CH-1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland. CCPR/C/OP/7 UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATION Sales No. E.06.XIV.1 ISBN 92-1-130294-3 ii CONTENTS (Selected decisions — Sixty-sixth to seventy-fourth sessions) Page Introduction........................................................................................................................... 1 FINAL DECISIONS A. Decision declaring a communication admissible (the number of the Committee session is indicated in brackets) No. 845/1999 [67] Rawle Kennedy v. Trinidad and Tobago............................. 5 B. Decisions declaring a communication inadmissible (the number of the Committee session is indicated in brackets) No. 717/1996 [66] Acuña Inostroza et al v. Chile.............................................. 13 No. 880/1999 [74] Terry Irving v. Australia...................................................... 18 No. 925/2000 [73] Wan Kuok Koi v. Portugal .................................................. 22 C. Views under article 5 (4) of the Optional Protocol No. 580/1994 [74] Glen Ashby v. Trinidad and Tobago ................................... 29 No. 688/1996 [69] María Sybila Arredondo v. Peru.......................................... 36 No. 701/1996 [69] Cesario Gómez Vázquez v. Spain........................................ 43 No. 727/1996 [71] Dobroslav Paraga v. Croatia ................................................ 48 No. 736/1997 [70] Malcolm Ross v.
  • CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM GLOSSARY of TERMS Arraignment

    CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM GLOSSARY of TERMS Arraignment

    CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM GLOSSARY OF TERMS Arraignment: The court hearing in which the defendant is formally charged with a crime and enters a plea of guilty or not guilty. Bail: An amount of money which is sometimes imposed by the court to ensure the defendant’s appearance at future court hearings. A defendant held in custody is required to post bail in order to be released. Bail can be posted either at court or at the House of Correction. Bail Hearing: A hearing to determine whether or not an incarcerated defendant or convicted offender will be released from custody and to determine what amount (if any) he/she must pay as a bond to assure his/her presence at future proceedings (e.g., trial). This may also include specific conditions of bail, e.g., no contact with the victim or witness, must attend treatment programs, etc. Continuance: A delay or postponement of a court hearing. CORI report: Criminal Offender Record Information report prepared by the state Criminal History Systems Board. A CORI report includes the history of each criminal charge, from pre‐trial through court proceedings through sentencing. Default: A defendant's failure to appear at a required legal proceeding. Defendant: A person formally charged with a crime. Disposition: What happened with your case. Felony: A crime punishable by incarceration in the state prison for a period of years. Grand Jury: A group of 23 people that hear evidence presented by a prosecutor to determine if a formal criminal charge (indictment) shall be issued in a case. Misdemeanor: A crime punishable by a fine or incarceration in the House of Correction for a maximum of 2 1/2 years.
  • PETITION for EXPUNGEMENT FILED in a CIRCUIT COURT – ACQUITTAL/DISMISSAL (Page 4 of These Instructions), for Additional Information

    PETITION for EXPUNGEMENT FILED in a CIRCUIT COURT – ACQUITTAL/DISMISSAL (Page 4 of These Instructions), for Additional Information

    Form CC-1473 PETITION FOR EXPUNGEMENT FILED IN A Form CC-1473 CIRCUIT COURT – ACQUITTAL/DISMISSAL Using This Revisable PDF Form 1. Copies a. Original – to court. b. Copy – arrange to have served on Commonwealth’s Attorney in the county or city in which the petition is filed. 2. Attachments a. Copy of order or acquittal or dismissal. b. Copy of warrant(s) or indictment(s) for the charge(s) you seek to have expunged. c. Completed circuit court form CC-1416, COVER SHEET FOR FILING CIVIL ACTIONS, if required by the clerk. 3. Preparation details a. Data Element Nos. 1-20 prepared by the petitioner or the attorney for the petitioner. b. Data Element Nos. 21-24 prepared by the clerk of court or deputy clerk, who will also provide or complete the case number if unknown to the petitioner (Data Element No. 1). c. Data Element No. 25 is provided for the use of the petitioner. See circuit court form CC-1473 (INST), INSTRUCTIONS FOR PETITION FOR EXPUNGEMENT FILED IN A CIRCUIT COURT – ACQUITTAL/DISMISSAL (page 4 of these instructions), for additional information. OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA Form CC-1473 Revised 11/15 PETITION FOR EXPUNGEMENT Case No. ................................1................................ ............. FILED IN A CIRCUIT COURT – ACQUITTAL/DISMISSAL Commonwealth of Virginia VA. CODE § 19.2-392.2 A ................................................................................................2 ....................................................................................... Circuit Court
  • Bail Reform Revisited: the Impact of New York's Amended Bail Law On

    Bail Reform Revisited: the Impact of New York's Amended Bail Law On

    Bail Reform Revisited The Impact of New York’s Amended Bail Law on Pretrial Detention By Michael Rempel and Krystal Rodriguez Bail Reform Revisited: The Impact of New York’s Amended Bail Law on Pretrial Detention By Michael Rempel and Krystal Rodriguez © May 2020 Center for Court Innovation 520 Eighth Avenue, 18th Floor New York, New York 10018 646.386.3100 fax 212.397.0985 www.courtinnovation.org For correspondence, please contact Michael Rempel ([email protected]) or Krystal Rodriguez ([email protected]) at the Center for Court Innovation. Acknowledgements We would like to express our profound gratitude to a range of partners across New York who came together to forge an understanding of how New York’s bail statute has been amended and its significance for the future use of money bail and pretrial detention statewide. We are especially indebted to Alex Rhodd and Vincent Ciaccio at the Legal Aid Society who read and coded more than 600 case files of people charged with burglary in the second degree to help us estimate the significant, yet elusive, changes in the handling of this common charge. We thank Scott Levy at The Bronx Defenders who conducted a similar analysis in the Bronx. Also at the Legal Aid Society, we thank Marie Ndiaye for her valuable comments on an earlier draft. At the New York City Council, we benefited from the timely leadership of Brian Crow and Maxwell Kampfner-Williams, who organized an early multi-agency working session on April 3 and continued to offer suggestions and guidance in the days and weeks that followed.
  • Rule 48 TITLE 18, APPENDIX—RULES of CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Page 180

    Rule 48 TITLE 18, APPENDIX—RULES of CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Page 180

    Rule 48 TITLE 18, APPENDIX—RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Page 180 (c) TIMING OF A MOTION. A party must serve a that the public prosecutor may enter a nolle prosequi in written motion—other than one that the court his discretion, without any action by the court, pre- may hear ex parte—and any hearing notice at vails in the Federal courts, Confiscation Cases, 7 Wall. least 7 days before the hearing date, unless a 454, 457; United States v. Woody, 2 F.2d 262 (D.Mont.). rule or court order sets a different period. For This provision will permit the filing of a nolle prosequi only by leave of court. This is similar to the rule now good cause, the court may set a different period prevailing in many States. A.L.I. Code of Criminal Pro- upon ex parte application. cedure, Commentaries, pp. 895–897. (d) AFFIDAVIT SUPPORTING A MOTION. The mov- 2. The rule confers the power to file a dismissal by ing party must serve any supporting affidavit leave of court on the Attorney General, as well as on with the motion. A responding party must serve the United States attorney, since under existing law any opposing affidavit at least one day before the Attorney General exercises ‘‘general superintend- the hearing, unless the court permits later serv- ence and direction’’ over the United States attorneys ice. ‘‘as to the manner of discharging their respective du- ties,’’ 5 U.S.C. 317 [now 28 U.S.C. 509, 547]. Moreover it (As amended Apr. 29, 2002, eff.
  • U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

    U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

    U.S. Citizenship Non-Precedent Decision of the and Immigration Administrative Appeals Office Services MATTER OF A-A- DATE: NOV. 20, 2019 APPEAL OF VERMONT SERVICE CENTER DECISION PETITION: FORM I-360, PETITION FOR AMERASIAN, WIDOW(ER), OR SPECIAL IMMIGRANT The Petitioner seeks immigrant classification as an abused spouse of a U.S. citizen under the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) provisions, codified at section 204(a)(l)(A)(iii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1154(a)(l)(A)(iii). The Director of the Vermont Service Center (the Director) denied the Form I-360, Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er), or Special Immigrant (VAWA petition), concluding that the Petitioner did not establish that she was a person of good moral character. On appeal, the Petitioner submits a basis statement and a brief reasserting her eligibility for immigrant classification under the VAWA provisions. Upon de novo review of the entire record, we will dismiss the appeal. I. LAW A petitioner who is the spouse of a U.S. citizen may self-petition for immigrant classification if the petitioner demonstrates, among other requirements, that the petitioner is a person of good moral character. Section 204(a)(l)(A)(iii)(II)(bb) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. § 204.2(c)(l)(vii). Primary evidence of a petitioner's good moral character is their affidavit, which should be accompanied by local police clearances or state-issued criminal background checks from each of the petitioner's residences during the three years before the petition was filed. 8 C.F.R.
  • Criminal Justice Terms & Definitions

    Criminal Justice Terms & Definitions

    Criminal Justice Terms & Definitions Arraignment - A hearing in which the defendant is formally charged and can plead either guilty, not guilty or no contest. In felony cases, an arraignment follows a preliminary hearing. Bind over - At the time of the preliminary hearing, if the judge finds there is probable cause to believe that the defendant committed a crime, the defendant is ordered to stand trial. Criminal Complaint - A formal charging document, filed by the District Attorney, setting forth the charge(s) and facts of an alleged crime. Defendant – The person charged with a criminal offense. This is the person alleged to have committed a particular crime. Dismissal - The charge or charges against the defendant are dismissed. No conviction. District Attorney - Under state law, the prosecuting attorney who represents the state in each county. Assistant District Attorney - An attorney who acts on the District Attorney's behalf. Felony - A crime that is punishable by confinement in a state prison for a term exceeding one year. Information - A charging document that is filed with the Court after the preliminary hearing. This document formally charges the defendant. Initial Appearance - A defendant's first appearance in court. The court advises the defendant of the charge(s), penalties, rights and sets bond. In felony cases, a date is often set for a preliminary hearing. In misdemeanor cases, the initial appearance is also the arraignment and, often times, the defendant will enter a plea. Misdemeanor - A crime that is punishable by confinement to a county jail for one year or less and/or a fine. Motions - Court hearings held to answer legal questions.
  • FIRST SECTION CASE of ZALYAN and OTHERS V. ARMENIA

    FIRST SECTION CASE of ZALYAN and OTHERS V. ARMENIA

    FIRST SECTION CASE OF ZALYAN AND OTHERS v. ARMENIA (Applications nos. 36894/04 and 3521/07) JUDGMENT STRASBOURG 17 March 2016 This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision. ZALYAN AND OTHERS v. ARMENIA JUDGMENT 1 In the case of Zalyan and Others v. Armenia, The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of: Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska, President, Ledi Bianku, Kristina Pardalos, Aleš Pejchal, Robert Spano, Pauliine Koskelo, judges, Siranush Sahakyan, ad hoc judge, and André Wampach, Deputy Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 23 February 2016, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date: PROCEDURE 1. The case originated in two applications (nos. 36894/04 and 3521/07) against the Republic of Armenia lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by three Armenian nationals, Mr Arayik Zalyan (“the first applicant”), Mr Razmik Sargsyan (“the second applicant”) and Mr Musa Serobyan (“the third applicant”) (jointly “the applicants”), on 23 September 2004 by the first applicant and 9 November 2006 by all three applicants jointly. 2. The applicants were represented by Mr H. Alumyan and Mr S. Voskanyan, lawyers practising in Yerevan. The Armenian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr G. Kostanyan, Representative of the Republic of Armenia at the European Court of Human Rights. 3. The applicants alleged, in particular, that they had been subjected to torture during the period from 19 to 23 April 2004 and there had been no effective investigation into their allegations of ill-treatment.
  • Bail and Pre-‐Trial Detention

    Bail and Pre-‐Trial Detention

    BAIL AND PRE-TRIAL DETENTION: PERTINENT CONSIDERATIONS UNDER THE ADMINISTRATION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE LEGISLATION* 1.0 INTRODUCTION The Criminal Justice framework, exhibits severe tension with rights and liberty with particular reference the right to liberty and fair hearing enshrined in sections 35 and 36 of the Constitution. An Arrest and detention restricts free movement of a person especially where they are not done pursuant to a court order. Although justified by the Constitution, section 35(6) of the same constitution requires that a person who is arrested or detained in such circumstances shall be brought before a court of law within a reasonable time, and if he is not tried within a period of – (a) two months from the date of his arrest or detention in the case of a person who is in custody or is not entitled to bail; or (b) three months from the date of his arrest or detention in the case of a person who has been released on bail, he shall (without prejudice to any further proceedings that may be brought against him) be released either unconditionally or upon such conditions as are reasonably necessary to ensure that he appears for trial at a later date. The Constitution further elaborates on what amounts to “reasonable time” in these words – (a) in the case of an arrest or detention in any place where there is * Presentation By Prof. Adedeji Adekunle SAN At The 2019 Orientation Course a court of competent jurisdiction within a radius of forty kilometres, a period of one day; and (b) in any other case, a period of two days or such longer period as in the circumstances may be considered by the court to be reasonable.