The recent Court of Appeals case on a competing adoption petition litigation issued on August 22, 2013 (citation below) defined with more specificity the meaning of “weighty consideration” given to parents’ choice of a fit custodian. Here the parents whom have been adjudicated as having neglected their children consented to E.A., the great aunt’s adoption petition competing against W.s the foster parents. The attachment study that was conducted did not factor or involved the children’s attachment to E.A. In short, it was one sided attachment evaluation. The study clearly established though a secure attachment to W.s – the foster parents.
Read More
Archives for dc dui lawyer
DC COURT OF APPEALS REVERSES FINDING OF NEGLECT
The Court of Appeals on July 25, 2013 in IN RE ANG.P. & AND.P.; (Nos. 11-FS-1584 & 11-FS-1585), reversed the lower court finding of neglect against a biological mother who was charged with neglecting her children by leaving them without proper parenting, care and control. The legal standard specifically provides: a child is neglected if he or she “is without proper parental care or control, subsistence, education as required by law, or other care necessary for his or her physical, mental or emotional health, and the deprivation is not due to the lack of financial means of his or her
Read More
RECENT SUPREME COURT DECISION LEGALIZING DNA SWAP UPON ARREST
The US Supreme Court on June 3, 2013 in Maryland v. King (No. 12–207) and in a 5-4 narrow decision legalized taking the arrestee’s DNA sample along with the fingerprinting and mug shots. The case was initiated in the MD State court from the collection of DNA in 2009 from Alonzo Jay King Jr. after his arrest on assault charges in Wicomico County, Md. King’s DNA sample collected by swabbing of his cheek, positive matched evidence from a 2003 rape case, and he was convicted of that crime which was unresolved. The MD Court of Appeals ruled that the State
Read More
DC COURT OF APPEALS REVERSES CONVICTION DUE TO UNCORROBORATED CONFESSION:
The Court of Appeals recently in IN RE KA (No. 10-FS-1614, Feb. 2013) reversed K.A.’s weapons possession charges focusing on the governing legal principles of convictions based on confessions alone and the necessary corroboration in support thereof. The Court reiterated the long established Supreme Court legal principle, which requires confession to be corroborated in order to “forestall convictions based on extrajudicial confessions the reliability of which is a matter of suspicion.” Essentially in cases were conviction is based solely on a confession, self made statement, the government is required to introduce substantial independent evidence which would tend to establish the
Read More
THE DC COMPREHENSIVE IMPAIRED DRIVING ACT: DC DWI/DUI LAWYER
This blog highlights some of the drastic changes to the drinking and driving law in the District. The DC Comprehensive Impaired Driving Act of 2012 increased significantly (doubled) the penalties for drinking and driving and also increased the mandatory minimum sentences as such. Accordingly the first offense conviction on DUI/DWI now carries the same penalties as most criminal misdemeanors, a maximum of: 180 days/$1000 fines. The minimum statutory imposed incarceration even for the first time offenders was also doubles based on the blood alcohol level/content commonly referred to as BAC. That is a BAC of 0.08 or more is considered
Read More
PETITIONER’S FTINESS FINDING IN THE ADOPTION PROCEEDINGS: RELEVANT CASES AND THE STATUTORY PROVISIONS
This blog addresses legal principles applicable to the court’s fitness finding in the adoption cases when the health or fitness of the adoptive petitioner is at issue. There are statutory provisions that address both fitness as well as health of the petitioners, among other parties, and relevant case law, which extend possible waiver of the doctor-patient privilege when in the best interest of the child or justice to the petitioners as well as the natural parents. There is the Termination of parental rights: D.C. Code §16-2353 (b)(2), the court is charged with in considering what is in the best interest
Read More
DC Drinking and Driving Implied Consent Statute; submit or not to the blood alcohol content test?
Upon being stopped for suspected drinking and driving, and before being administrated or submitting to alcohol/drug detection devices, the police officer has to inform you explicitly as to your right to refuse test submission pursuant to DC Implied Consent Act. DC Statute Sec. 50-1905 makes it clear that refusal to submit to two chemical tests pursuant to Sec. 15-1902 (blood, urine, or breath), will result in an automatic suspension of the driving privileges in the District for a period of 12 months. Before suspension, the arresting officer has to submit an affidavit stating that the implied consent act was explained, and
Read More
LEGAL NEWS MARCH 2012
RECENT COURT OF APPEALS: V.C.B. v. U.S., No. 10-CO-89 (Decided February 16, 2012) Available at: http://tinyurl.com/75gm3fu Challenge to trial court’s refusal to seal arrest records after case dismissed. Significant as the case involved child witnesses –Remanded. Patterson v. U.S., No. 08-CF-876, 10-CO-1611 (Decided February 16, 2012) Available at: http://tinyurl.com/6u7p2l7 Expert testimony and requirements for admissibility. OTHER NEWS: Failed Adoptions Lead to More Homeless Youths (NYTimes) Available here. Calls for More Reporting of Suspected Child Abuse (NPR) Available here. Poverty Thinning Out But Still Hurting District (Washington Examiner) Available here.
Read More
How our expectations of privacy has been morphed by the technology and its widespread development
The US Supreme Court will soon address the legality of allowing the police to monitor the movements of the US mobile phone users without a warrant. The issue in the case before the Supreme Court in US v. Jones is whether the police officers can track suspects’ car via a GPS device without first obtaining a warrant. In that case, the suspect was surveilled for some 28 days by the law enforcement GPS device planted without a warrant. The question before the Court there is whether the defendant had a legitimate expectation of privacy as his car was at all
Read More