Court restores voting rights of 100,000 jail inmates
Court Alerts
A state appeals court is restoring the voting rights of about 100,000 local jail inmates statewide who are serving a year or less for felony convictions.
The state said it would not appeal last week's decision from the 1st District Court of Appeal. The affected inmates were eligible to vote until last year, when the state disenfranchised them.
For three decades, California's secretary of state had interpreted the state Constitution as barring voting by those in state prisons and those on parole after their release. The appeals court said the state wrongly changed the policy last year to include persons convicted of felonies but sentenced to a year or less in a local county jail.
The League of Women Voters brought the case on behalf of three San Francisco County jail inmates.
Related listings
-
New EPA Smog Rules Infringe Clean Air Act
Court Alerts 12/27/2006The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia rejected the new federal rules for smog reduction on Friday, stating that the Environmental Protection Agency "has failed to heed the restrictions on its discretion set forth in the Act." The smog ...
-
Groups sue Dallas suburb over immigration law
Court Alerts 12/27/2006Two civil rights groups filed suit in federal court Tuesday to block enforcement of a town ordinance passed in November by the Dallas suburb of Farmer's Branch requiring apartment renters to show proof of US residency and penalizing landlords who ren...
-
Court tells EPA they can't Relax Smog rules
Court Alerts 12/26/2006The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia rejected the new federal rules for smog reduction on Friday, stating that the Environmental Protection Agency "has failed to heed the restrictions on its discretion set forth in the Act." The smog ...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.