Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility
Home (page 5)

Tag Archives: Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III

Inmates’ rights under Speedy Trial Act were not violated (access required)

Although two state inmates who were federally indicted for coordinating a methamphetamine distribution ring from prison claimed their superseding indictment was filed more than 30 days after an arrest and thus violated the Speedy Trial Act, or STA, there is ...

Read More »

Maryland ad disclosure law violates First Amendment (access required)

Where a Maryland law requires newspapers and other media platforms to publish certain information about the political ads they carry and retain that information for inspection, the law violates the First Amendment under either strict or exacting scrutiny. Background A ...

Read More »

SC stopped from ending Planned Parenthood agreement (access required)

Where the Medicaid Act’s free-choice-of provider provision creates a private right enforceable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Medicaid recipient established she would suffer irreparable harm in the absence of a preliminary injunction, South Carolina was stopped from terminating ...

Read More »

4th Circuit: Jury should decide venue in ‘bath salts’ case (access required)

A divided federal appeals panel has overturned the convictions of three accused drug distributors because a jury never was asked if the charges were brought in the right locality. A two-judge majority of a panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit ...

Read More »

Federal gun charge based on state domestic violence conviction (access required)

Although the defendant claimed his federal gun charge could not be based on his Virginia conviction for domestic violence because he did not knowingly and intelligently waive his right to a jury trial in Virginia as required under federal statute, ...

Read More »

Investors could not sue over media statements (access required)

The fraud claims of Chinese investors who each invested approximately $500,000 in a start-up car company without reading the underlying investment documents were dismissed because the investors could not have justifiably relied on stray misstatements made by the company’s founders ...

Read More »