Calif court wants proof on confining sex predators
Legal News Feed
The California Supreme Court on Thursday questioned the constitutionality of a provision of "Jessica's Law" that lets authorities indefinitely confine sexually violent predators.
It's the first of two decisions the court is expected to issue in the coming days over the legality of the law that was passed as Proposition 82 by 70 percent of voters in 2006.
The Supreme Court is scheduled to rule Monday on a separate legal challenge to a provision prohibiting released predators from living within 2,000 feet of a school or park.
On Thursday, the court dealt with the issue of whether sexually violent predators can be treated differently than other violent felons, who can only be held for defined terms in mental health facilities after prison.
In a 5-2 decision written by Justice Carlos Moreno, the Supreme Court offered suggestions about how government lawyers should approach the case.
Moreno said it could be that mental disorders make it likely that sexually violent predators will re-offend. Or, they could "pose a greater risk to a particularly vulnerable class of victims, such as children," Moreno noted.
Nonetheless, Moreno concluded the government had not produced any evidence to distinguish sexual predators from other violent offenders. California Deputy Attorney General Bradley A. Weinreb, who argued the case before the Supreme Court, didn't return a telephone call.
Related listings
-
Supreme Court Voids Campaign Spending Curbs
Legal News Feed 01/22/2010A divided U.S. Supreme Court struck down decades-old restrictions on corporate campaign spending, reversing two of its precedents and freeing companies to conduct advertising campaigns that explicitly try to sway voters. The 5-4 majority, invoking th...
-
Supreme Court bars broadcast of Prop 8 trial in California
Legal News Feed 01/14/2010The Supreme Court split along ideological lines Wednesday as it barred a federal judge in San Francisco from broadcasting a high-profile trial involving same-sex marriage. The court issued an unsigned opinion that said lower courts had not followed p...
-
Ohio governor says he regrets slot machine plan
Legal News Feed 12/22/2009A feisty, yet reflective Gov. Ted Strickland said Monday that his biggest mistake in 2009 was deciding to rely on revenue from racetrack slot machines that were later sidelined by the Ohio Supreme Court.It was one of the most controversial decisions ...
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.