Court says age must be considered in interrogation
Court Alerts
The Supreme Court says courts must consider age when examining whether a child is in custody and must be given Miranda rights.
The high court on Thursday ruled that police and school officials were wrong when they interviewed a 13-year-old special education student about a string of break-ins in Chapel Hill, N.C.
The interview took place in a closed room at his school. The boy was never read his Miranda rights, and his lawyer challenged the use of his confession.
The North Carolina Supreme Court refused to throw out the confession and said courts cannot look at age when examining whether the boy thought he could leave.
But the U.S. Supreme Court said in a 5-4 vote that courts have to consider how old the child was during the interrogation.
Related listings
-
Court: NJ Megan's Law killer can continue appeal
Court Alerts 06/14/2011The man convicted of killing a 7-year-old girl who became the namesake of Megan's Laws across the country should be allowed to pursue claims that his lawyers were ineffective, a state appeals court ruled Tuesday.But the appeals court did not agree wi...
-
Suspected Colombian drug kingpin nixes plea deal
Court Alerts 06/14/2011The suspected leader of a Colombian cocaine cartel had planned to plead guilty Tuesday to a drug conspiracy charge, but opted at the last minute to go to trial instead because the deal prosecutors offered meant he would likely die in prison.An exaspe...
-
Court to decide whether farmers must pay tax
Court Alerts 06/13/2011The Supreme Court will decide whether a couple must pay taxes on the bankruptcy sale of their family farm.The high court on Monday agreed to hear an appeal from Lynwood and Brenda Hall.The Halls were forced to sell their family farm for $960,000 to s...
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.