FINDLAW: Daily Opinion Summaries for U.S. Supreme Court – 1/14/09


Herring v. US, No. 07-513
In circumstances where police mistakes leading to an unlawful search under the Fourth Amendment are the result of isolated negligence attenuated from the arrest, rather than systemic error or reckless disregard of constitutional requirements, the exclusionary rule does not apply.

Oregon v. Ice, No. 07-901
In the context of cases involving defendants who have been tried and convicted of multiple offenses, the Court rules that a state’s practice of constraining judges’ discretion by requiring them to find certain facts before imposing consecutive sentences, rather than concurrent sentences, does not violate the Sixth Amendment as construed in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U. S. 466, 490, and Blakely v. Washington, 542 U. S. 296.

NY Times (John Eligon): Paterson Picks Chief Judge Nominee

(Full text of article in NYTIMES)

Gov. David A. Paterson nominated Justice Jonathan Lippman on Tuesday to be the next chief judge of the New York Court of Appeals, the state’s highest court. Justice Lippman, 63, the presiding justice of the First Judicial Department of the Appellate Division of State Supreme Court, one of the state’s midlevel appeals courts, is expected to be introduced at a news conference in Albany on Wednesday. Despite the nomination, Mr. Paterson renewed his criticism of the selection process. The Commission on Judicial Nomination gave Mr. Paterson a list of seven male candidates last month, and the governor was required to select one of them to replace Judith S. Kaye, who was the first woman on the Court of Appeals and the first female chief judge…He was widely considered to be the choice favored by Ms. Kaye, who was forced to step down at the end of last year after reaching the mandatory retirement age of 70. Ms. Kaye served 25 years on the court and 15 years as chief judge, the longest tenure of any chief judge in state history.

FINDLAW: Daily Opinion Summaries for New York Court of Appeals – 01/13/09


People v. Silvestry, No. ssm52mem09

An appellate division order is affirmed where the record supports the lower court’s determination that police lacked reasonable suspicion, thus the matter is beyond the court’s review.