ABC 7 NEWS-WJLA SEGMENT INTERVIEW WTIH MR. STEIN
Read More
CHILD CUSTODY ISSUES DURING THE PANDEMIC
District of Columbia along with majority of the States has a significant stay home order in place that limits all outdoor activities except those as defined as Essential Activities: Engaging in an activity or performing a task essential to an individual’s own health or safety, or to the health or safety of the individual’s family or household members, including pets. Examples: Obtaining medical supplies or medication; visiting a health care professional; or obtaining supplies needed to work from home. Obtaining services or supplies for an individual’s own self or the individual’s family or household members; or delivering those services or supplies to others that are necessary to maintain the safety, sanitation, and operation of residences. Performing work providing essential products and services at an Essential Business or otherwise
Read More
CHILD’S PREFERENCE IN CUSTODY LITIGATION: LEGAL ELEMENT
The Court of Appeals in DUGUMA v. AYALEW recently decided addressed the issue of preference of the children in a custody and divorce proceeding among parents. Appellant mother lost the custody trial with the court granting sole physical custody to the father and argued on appeal mainly: That the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to grant her counsel’s request for a continuance, That the court erred in failing to interview the children or appoint a guardian ad litem to determine the children’s wishes as to their custody and, That even aside from the absence of evidence as to
Read More
DC SUPERIOR COURT CASE HEARING DIRECTIVE & SCHEDULE AS OF 3/15
The court has posted a detailed plan for adjustments in operations for all case types on its website in light of the current public health emergency. For more information, counsel and parties are asked to review the plan. The court is limiting the matters it will hear before May 1, 2020. A summary of the plan is as follows: The court is not closing and is open for all new filings and pleadings in any Division. Electronic filing will continue. All jury trials in progress shall proceed as scheduled – jurors in those trials should report. New jury trials in criminal cases including those with detained defendants are deferred until at least March 30 and may be extended beyond then – all persons summoned for jury duty from March 16‐27 should not come to the courthouse. The court will only hear emergency matters in the Civil, Family Court, Probate and Tax Divisions and Auditor Master – in general all other matters are continued but counsel and parties should review the plan to be certain. All evictions including those involving foreclosed homeowners are stayed. All Stay Away Orders and all Protection Orders in Domestic Violence cases are extended until May 1. Petitioners seeking new protection orders will have access to the court processes. The court will conduct hearings in the following matters in criminal cases: Drug Court and Mental Health Community Court Extradition matters Presentment of indictments and other grand jury matters : Presentments, arraignments, preliminary hearings and status hearings for detained defendants Pretrial and Probation show cause hearings Motions to review conditions of release The Family Court will conduct hearings in the following matters: Juvenile cases: initial hearings, trials with detained respondents, petition for writ of habeas corpus and JBDP and HOPE court hearings for detained respondents. Mental Health Commission hearings for inpatient respondents Mental Health (MHE) Probable Cause hearings Abuse and Neglect Cases: New removals/initial hearings and all trials to achieve permanency, unless continued by consent of all parties. The Marriage Bureau will be open to issue marriage licenses. Wedding ceremonies previously scheduled will go forward, please limit the numbers of attendees. If you wish to reschedule your ceremony, please contact the Marriage Bureau at 202‐879‐1212 . No additional weddings will be scheduled. FOR MORE DETAILED AND UP TO DATE INFORMATION: DC SUPERIOR COURT
Read More
SEALING OF THE ARREST RECORD STATUTE DECONSTRUCTED: RECENT COURT OF APPEALS CASE
The Court of Appeals in Washington v. U.S., decided recently addressed and interpreted the implications of “interest of Justice” in connection with sealing of the arrest records. DC Code 16-803.02 provides in pertinent parts: (a) person arrested for, charged with, or convicted of a criminal offense pursuant to the District of Columbia Official Code or the District of Columbia Municipal Regulations that was decriminalized or legalized after the date of the arrest, charge, or conviction may file a motion to seal the record of the arrest, charge, conviction, and related Superior Court proceedings at any time, and (A) In cases
Read More
DC PRENUPTIAL AGREEMENTS: FAQ
1) I have no assets or property now to protect or to designate, do I still need a prenuptial agreement? Yes, because not only prenuptial agreements protect assets and property before marriage, certain language can be drafted to protect future assets as potentially non-marital. 2) What are the common items prenuptial agreements protect? Assets and property, inheritance, retirement accounts, trust benefits and distributions, business and partnership ownership to name a few. 3) How can one insure that the agreements drafted are enforceable? Premarital agreements are not enforceable if: Not voluntarily executed by both parties The agreement was unconscionable The unconscionability
Read More
DISCOVERY UNDER THE JENCKS ACT, LEGAL ELEMENTS OF UNLAWFUL ENTRY STATUTE
The Court of Appeals recently in Rahman v. U.S., addressed the legal elements of the unlawful entry statute as well as addressing the appellant’s discovery requests pursuant to the Jencks act. Factually, appellant was told to leave the premises at a Mcdonald’s location by a special police officer (“SPO”) as it appeared that he was loitering or panhandling at the location. Appellant initially refused to leave but eventually left the premises and returned few minutes later at which time he was arrested for unlawful entry by a police officer. On appeal, the appellant essentially argued that he could not have
Read More
ILLEGAL STOP AND ARREST VALID: RECENT COURT OF APPEALS DECISION
The Court of Appeals in Campbell v. U.S. decided on January 30, 2020, in essence affirmed the trial court’s ruling and convictions denying the ineffective assistance of counsel claim. Factually, Campbell was approached by a police officer in a middle of a night sitting in a stolen car, visibly drinking from an open container of alcohol (vodka bottle). The critical factual element being that the car was parked in a private church parking lot. Campbell was arrested for POCA (Possession of Open Container of Alcohol), and the ensuing search revealed that the car was stolen and thus was charged with
Read More
DC CIVIL PROTECTION HEARINGS/TRIAL AND DISCOVERY
The Civil Protection filing and litigation although has an expansive reach in enforcing a range of orders, has a limited scope with regards to witness statement under the Jencks Act and generally discovery before the hearing. Moreover, the threshold burden of proof is rather low. Specifically, the Statute provides: If, after hearing, the judicial officer finds that there is good cause to believe the respondent has committed or threatened to commit a criminal offense against the petitioner or against petitioner’s animal or an animal in petitioner’s household, the judicial officer may issue a protection order that: Directs the respondent to
Read More
UNSEAL ADOPTION RECORDS: DC COURT OF APPEALS
The Court of Appeals in In re G.D.L., decided on January 2, 2020, addressed the legal criteria to have the adoption records unsealed. The appellant who was no longer a minor sought a court order release of his adoption records, original birth certificate, and biological parental information. The trial court in balancing all interests involved in deciding the motion for disclosure ordered to protect G.D.L.’s birth father’s information and directed the child-placement agency to give G.D.L. redacted copies of the original birth certificate and adoption records. The biological mother’s information was already known to the appellant and not subject of
Read More