Determining First Offender Status: STATE v. M.D., Cite as 196 Ohio App.3d 174, 2011-Ohio-1804 Posted by Zukerman on Monday, April 30, 2012

Applicant sought the sealing of all official records of his prior convictions for receiving stolen property, forgery, uttering, and obstructing justice. The application was denied, and defendant appealed. The Court of Appeals, 2009 WL 3478517, reversed and remanded with instructions. On remand, the Court of Common Pleas, Cuyahoga County, No. CR-360551, issued a journal entry determining that applicant did not qualify as a first offender for record-sealing purposes and again denied the application. Applicant appealed. Continue reading "Determining First Offender Status: STATE v. M.D., Cite as 196 Ohio App.3d 174, 2011-Ohio-1804" …

Fourth Amendment: Physically invading personal property to gather info, means a search occurs Posted by Zukerman on Monday, April 16, 2012

In U.S. v. Jones, Docket No. 10-1259, the Supreme Court of the United States, in a vote of 9 to 0, held that the installation of a global positioning system (GPS) tracking device on a suspect’s vehicle, without a warrant, constituted an unlawful search under the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution. The significance of the decision in Jones lies in the narrow basis for the holding. In essence, the majority’s holding reflects an irreducible constitutional minimum: “when the Government physically invades personal property to gather information, a search occurs.” The Majority’s trespassory test does not offer guidance in a world where physical intrusion is now unnecessary to many forms of surveillance. Continue reading "Fourth Amendment: Physically invading personal property to gather info, means a search occurs" …