Reinventing the Dark Art

Well the time has come to begin reinventing this blog.

In the past I was doing a sort of on-going analysis of Texas and Federal legal events, but that really won't work in my present situation.

Therefore, I may in the future continue to post, but it will be much more theoretical. I will also attempt to be consistent with the stated topic of this blog, and talk more about BEING a lawyer than about the law.

In any case, whether I make regular posts or not, thanks to all three of my readers.

I'm alive, blog is dead

That about says it all. Don't expect updates until I figure out how my different practice fits with it all. In fact, I am just putting in this update because I feel like saying nothing.

gadzooks.

Change in Content

Due to recent (very happy) events, I can no longer continue my coverage of the Harris County Bible case.

I wish both the parties the best of luck, and I hope this case reaches a satisfactory conclusion.

Founding Principles?

Interesting article about the religious proclivities of our founding fathers. I find it particularly interesting in light of the recent ten comandments case (Van Orden) before the Supremes.

Big Enough to Drive a Van Through

Well the fifth circuit has finally ruled that driving a car through a medical facility's front door is NOT constitutionally protected. Well, I hope one can assume that it is not acceptable to drive a vehicle through the front door of anything but a garage, but this fellow was prosecuted under the FACE, or freedom of access to [abortion] clinics act. The defendant argued that he was protected by a constitutional right of free "speech." OK, so it's late, and the real argument was far more estoric and based on an interpretation of a prior SCOTUS decision.

However

I just don't see how driving a car through anyone's front door could even rationally be argued as a form of free speech or even free expression. It isn't expression, it is at best vandalism and at worst attempted murder. It is clearly an impediment to access as it is very difficult to get into a clinic when there is a Ford taking up the walkway.

I suppose the moral of this story is even the Fifth Circuit isn't conservative enough to condone this sort of behavior.

Decision;
Chronicle coverage

Death Penalty Dance - No Underage Partners

Continuing my practice of only making note of REALLY significant (in my view) info, the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that people who commit crimes while under 18 cannot be put to death for those crimes. This applies to a limited number of states, including my own home Texas which is one of the only three states to actually execute them (others just have a law on the books).

While the effect on active cases will be minimal, this should help us to come more in line with the rest of the western world.

Info at:
Decision:

(Check at SCOTUSblog)

Blog:

How Appealing
SCOTUSblog)


Media

Houston Chronicle
AP

Me and the blog

So here is the deal.

I am not following current events these days. Somewhere between deciding I want a different sort of employment situation and the last election I just quit.

The only exception I have is the last case I have on appeal, which regardless of where I end up I want to continue as attorney of record, and the Harris county bible case. This will probably change, but it hasn't changed as fast as I thought it would, so really, who knows?

I guess one thing I would like to do in the interim is find a bunch of sites about art with dark colors, or art based on dark subjects so that my search engine traffic (not related to missspellings) can have an easier time finding what they are looking for. For all of you, thanks for visiting, but you would do better to search for Giger.

Sentencing guidelines are no longer mandatory

A la SCOTUS

"JUSTICE BREYER delivered the opinion of the Court in part, concluding
that 18 U. S. C. A. §3553(b)(1), which makes the Federal Sentencing
Guidelines mandatory, is incompatible with today’s Sixth
Amendment “jury trial” holding and therefore must be severed and
excised from the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 (Act). Section
3742(e), which depends upon the Guidelines’ mandatory nature, also
must be severed and excised. So modified, the Act makes the Guidelines
effectively advisory, requiring a sentencing court to consider
Guidelines ranges, see §3553(a)(4), but permitting it to tailor the sentence
in light of other statutory concerns, see §3553(a). Pp. 2–26."
-from the syllabus

SCOTUSblog
How Appealing

Bible Has Been Removed.

No I'm not really back for good, but there is a Harris County bible update. Below is the relevant section of the docket:
Staley v Harris County Texas

1/10/05 COURT Order filed denying appellant's motion to stay final
judgment [4923977-1] in 04-20667, denying the motion of
Star of Hope Mission to intervene for purposes of appeal
[4925717-1], denying as moot the motion of Star of Hope
Mission for an order staying the district court's judgment
until district court rules on Star of Hope's motion to
intervene [4925717-2] in 04-20667 (EGJ/RHB) Copies to all
counsel. [04-20667, 04-20742] (pac) [04-20667 04-20742]

So the bible will be removed and Star of Hope will not be permitted to intervene. I can't find a written opinion but if I do I will post it.

According to the Chronicle, the bible has already been removed.

News:
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/page1/2986672
http://www.kwtx.com/home/headlines/1186017.html
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6810844/