|
|
|
Justin Timberlake charged with driving while intoxicated in the Hamptons
Headline Legal News |
2024/06/19 17:02
|
Pop star Justin Timberlake was charged early Tuesday with drunken driving in a village in New York’s Hamptons, after police said he ran a stop sign and veered out of his lane in the posh seaside summer retreat.
The boy band singer-turned-solo star and actor was driving a 2025 BMW in Sag Harbor around 12:30 a.m. when an officer stopped him and determined he was intoxicated, according to a court document.
“His eyes were bloodshot and glassy, a strong odor of an alcoholic beverage was emanating from his breath, he was unable to divide attention, he had slowed speech, he was unsteady afoot and he performed poorly on all standardized field sobriety tests,” the court papers said.
Timberlake, 43, told the officer he had one martini and was following some friends home, according to the documents. After being arrested and taken to a police station in nearby East Hampton, he refused a breath test, said the court papers, which listed his occupation as “professional” and said he’s “self-employed.”
The 10-time Grammy winner was released without bond later Tuesday morning after being arraigned in Sag Harbor. He was charged with a driving-while-intoxicated misdemeanor, and his next court date was scheduled for July 26, the Suffolk County district attorney’s office said.
Edward Burke Jr., a local lawyer representing Timberlake, declined to comment Tuesday other than to confirm the star doesn’t need to appear in person for his next court date. Timberlake’s California-based representatives didn’t return multiple requests for comment Tuesday.
The arrest brought a steady stream of curiosity seekers to the village’s quaint Main Street, with many taking photos in front of the brick municipal building throughout the day.
Even music legend Billy Joel, who owns a home in Sag Harbor, took in the scene outside the American Hotel, a popular hotel and restaurant located next to the courthouse where Timberlake had been spotted before his arrest.
“Judge not lest ye be judged,” the “Piano Man” singer told WPIX, declining to comment on Timberlake or his arrest.
A young Timberlake began performing as a Disney Mouseketeer, where his castmates included future girlfriend Britney Spears (he’s now married to actress Jessica Biel). He rose to fame in the behemoth boy band NSYNC, embarked on a solo recording career in 2002 and was one of pop’s most influential figures in the early 2000s.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trump's lawyers ask judge to lift gag order imposed during New York trial
Headline Legal News |
2024/06/11 00:07
|
Donald Trump’s lawyers are asking a New York judge to lift the gag order that barred the former president from commenting about witnesses, jurors and others tied to the criminal case that led to his conviction for falsifying records to cover up a potential sex scandal.
In a letter Tuesday, Trump lawyers Todd Blanche and Emil Bove asked Judge Juan M. Merchan to end the gag order, arguing there is nothing to justify “continued restrictions on the First Amendment rights of President Trump” now that the trial is over.
Among other reasons, the lawyers said Trump is entitled to “unrestrained campaign advocacy” in light of President Joe Biden’s public comments about the verdict last Friday, and continued public criticism of him by his ex-lawyer Michael Cohen and porn actor Stormy Daniels, both key prosecution witnesses.
Trump’s lawyers also contend the gag order must go away so he’s free to fully address the case and his conviction with the first presidential debate scheduled for June 27.
The Manhattan district attorney’s office declined to comment.
Merchan issued Trump’s gag order on March 26, a few weeks before the start of the trial, after prosecutors raised concerns about the presumptive Republican presidential nominee’s propensity to attack people involved in his cases.
Merchan later expanded it to prohibit comments about his own family after Trump made social media posts attacking the judge’s daughter, a Democratic political consultant. Comments about Merchan and District Attorney Alvin Bragg are allowed, but the gag order bars statements about court staff and members of Bragg’s prosecution team.
Trump was convicted Thursday of 34 counts of falsifying business records arising from what prosecutors said was an attempt to cover up a hush money payment to Daniels just before the 2016 election. She claims she had a sexual encounter with Trump a decade earlier, which he denies. He is scheduled to be sentenced July 11.
Prosecutors had said they wanted the gag order to “protect the integrity of this criminal proceeding and avoid prejudice to the jury.” In the order, Merchan noted prosecutors had sought the restrictions “for the duration of the trial.” He did not specify when they would be lifted.
Blanche told the Associated Press last Friday that it was his understanding the gag order would expire when the trial ended and that he would seek clarity from Merchan, which he did on Tuesday.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ippei Mizuhara sports betting case: Shohei Ohtani interpreter pleads guilty
Headline Legal News |
2024/06/05 16:01
|
As an interpreter, Ippei Mizuhara was supposed to bridge the gap between baseball star Shohei Ohtani and his English-speaking teammates and fans as the duo traveled from Southern California to ballparks across the U.S.
Instead, Mizuhara exploited the Japanese-English language barrier to isolate Ohtani and profit, in the truest sense, from his proximity to the two-way player ‘s power. On Tuesday, the ex-interpreter pleaded guilty in federal court in Santa Ana, California, to bank and tax fraud for stealing nearly $17 million from the unsuspecting athlete’s Arizona bank account.
He spent the money to cover his growing gambling bets and debts with an illegal bookmaker, plus $325,000 worth of baseball cards and, to the shock of prosecutors, his own medical bills.
“In fact, after we announced the charges, we only discovered more fraud in this case,” said Martin Estrada, U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California. “We discovered Mr. Mizuhara had victimized Mr. Ohtani to the extent that he wouldn’t even pay for dental. He stole money from Mr. Ohtani to pay for his own dental expenses.”
The case involved arguably the world’s most famous baseball player and the sport’s most valuable voice. Despite the international media frenzy, Tuesday’s 45-minute proceeding was fairly mundane: Ohtani was known as “Victim A” inside the courtroom and the ex-interpreter only spoke to acknowledge his guilt.
The case involved arguably the world’s most famous baseball player and the sport’s most valuable voice. Despite the international media frenzy, Tuesday’s 45-minute proceeding was fairly mundane: Ohtani was known as “Victim A” inside the courtroom and the ex-interpreter only spoke to acknowledge his guilt.
“I worked for Victim A and had access to his bank account and had fallen into major gambling debt,” Mizuhara told the judge. “I went ahead and wired money … with his bank account.”
He and his attorney declined to comment after the hearing.
Inside baseball, Mizuhara stood by Ohtani’s side for many of the Japanese sensation’s career highlights, from serving as his catcher during the Home Run Derby at the 2021 All-Star Game, to being there for his two American League MVP wins and his record-shattering $700 million, 10-year deal with the Los Angeles Dodgers.
Off the field, Mizuhara became Ohtani’s friend and confidant. He famously resigned from the Los Angeles Angels during the 2021 MLB lockout so he could keep speaking to Ohtani — he was rehired after a deal was struck — and their wives reportedly socialized.
But Mizuhara gambled it all away, betting tens of millions of dollars that weren’t his to wager on international soccer, the NBA, the NFL and college football — though prosecutors said he never bet on baseball.
Estrada, the U.S. attorney, said Ohtani was particularly vulnerable, despite his fame.
“Mr. Ohtani is an immigrant who came to this country, is not familiar with the ways of this country and therefore was easily prey to someone who was more familiar with our financial systems,” Estrada said during a news conference in downtown Los Angeles after the hearing.
Federal prosecutors said Mizuhara’s scheme began in 2021 when he switched the bank account’s contact information from Ohtani’s to his own, meaning any communication from the financial institution would be sent directly to him without Ohtani knowing.
Mizuhara capitalized on the language barrier to keep Ohtani’s financial advisers from understanding their client, and at times, Mizuhara even impersonated the player to the bank to prolong the fraud.
The ploy allowed Mizuhara to plunder just under $17 million from the account — which he’d helped Ohtani set up in Phoenix in 2018 to deposit his paychecks — from 2021 until earlier this year.
Mizuhara’s winning wagers totaled over $142 million, which he deposited in his own bank account and not Ohtani’s. But his losing bets were around $183 million, a net loss of nearly $41 million.
Tuesday’s guilty plea was anticipated after Mizuhara agreed to a deal with the U.S. Attorney’s Office last month. He pleaded guilty to one count of bank fraud, which carries up to 30 years in federal prison, and one count of subscribing to a false tax return, which could add a maximum of three years of incarceration.
A sentencing hearing is scheduled for October. Mizuhara also could be on the hook for restitution to Ohtani that could total nearly $17 million, as well as more than $1 million to the IRS. And as a legal permanent resident who has a green card, he might be deported to Japan. The investigation into Mizuhara stemmed from a broader probe of illegal sports bookmaking organizations in Southern California and the laundering of proceeds through casinos in Las Vegas. Overall, authorities have netted a dozen defendants.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trump hush money trial: Trump held in contempt of court for gag order violation
Headline Legal News |
2024/04/29 05:55
|
Donald Trump was held in contempt of court Tuesday and fined $9,000 for repeatedly violating a gag order that barred him from making public statements about witnesses, jurors and some others connected to his New York hush money case. And if he does it again, the judge warned, he could be jailed.
Prosecutors had alleged 10 violations, but New York Judge Juan M. Merchan found there were nine. The ruling was a stinging rebuke for the presumptive Republican nominee, who had insisted he was exercising his free speech rights. Trump stared down at the table in front of him as the judge read the ruling, frowning slightly.
Merchan wrote that he is “keenly aware of, and protective of,” Trump’s First Amendment rights, “particularly given his candidacy for the office of President of the United States.”
“It is critically important that defendant’s legitimate free speech rights not be curtailed, that he be able to fully campaign for the office which he seeks and that he be able to respond and defend himself against political attacks,” Merchan wrote.
Still, he warned, that the court would not tolerate “willful violations of its lawful orders and that if necessary and appropriate under the circumstances, it will impose an incarceratory punishment.”
The ruling came at the start of the second week of testimony in the historic case. Manhattan prosecutors say Trump and his associates took part in an illegal scheme to influence the 2016 presidential campaign by burying negative stories. He has pleaded not guilty.
Trump was ordered to pay the fine by the close of business Friday, Merchan ruled, and he must remove seven offending posts from his Truth Social account and two from his campaign website by 2:15 p.m. EDT Tuesday, Merchan said. The judge is also weighing other alleged gag order violations by Trump and will hear arguments Thursday.
Of the 10 posts, the one Merchan ruled was not a violation came on April 10, a post referring to witnesses Michael Cohen and Stormy Daniels as “sleaze bags.” Merchan said Trump’s contention that he was responding to previous posts by Cohen “is sufficient to give” him pause on whether the post was a violation.
Among those he found to be violations, Merchan ruled that a Trump post quoting Fox News host Jesse Watters’ claim that liberal activists were lying to infiltrate the jury “constitutes a clear violation” of the gag order. Merchan noted that the words contained within the quotation marks in Trump’s April 17 post misstated what Watters actually said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court questions obstruction charges brought against Jan. 6 rioters and Trump
Headline Legal News |
2024/04/17 15:50
|
The Supreme Court on Tuesday questioned whether federal prosecutors went too far in bringing obstruction charges against hundreds of participants in the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot. But it wasn’t clear how the justices would rule in a case that also could affect the prosecution of former President Donald Trump, who faces the same charge for his efforts to overturn his election loss in 2020.
The justices heard arguments over the charge of obstruction of an official proceeding in the case of Joseph Fischer, a former Pennsylvania police officer who has been indicted for his role in disrupting Congress’ certification of Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential election victory over Trump. Fischer is one of 330 people facing that charge, which stems from a law passed in the aftermath of the Enron financial scandal more than two decades ago to deal with the destruction of documents.
Trump is facing two charges in a separate case brought by special counsel Jack Smith in Washington that could be knocked out with a favorable ruling from the nation’s highest court. Next week, the justices will hear arguments over whether the former president and presumptive nominee for the 2024 Republican nomination has “absolute immunity” from prosecution in that case, a proposition that has so far been rejected by two lower courts.
Smith has argued separately in the immunity case that the obstruction charges against Trump are valid no matter how the court decides Fischer’s case. The first former U.S. president under indictment, Trump is on trial on hush money charges in New York and also has been charged with election interference in Georgia and with mishandling classified documents in Florida.
It was not clear after more than 90 minutes of arguments precisely where the court would land in Fischer’s case. Conservative justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch appeared most likely to side with Fischer, while liberal Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor seemed more favorable to the Justice Department’s position.
Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Ketanji Brown Jackson, a former federal public defender, expressed interest in more of a middle-ground outcome that might make it harder, but not impossible, for prosecutors to use the obstruction charge.
Some of the conservative justices said the law was so broad that it could be used against even peaceful protests and also questioned why the Justice Department has not brought charges under the provision in other violent protests.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retired Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy has memoir coming
Headline Legal News |
2024/04/04 19:50
|
Retired Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy has a two-volume memoir coming out this fall, tracking his life from growing up in California to his 30 years on the court, when he cast key votes on landmark cases ranging from abortion to gay marriage to campaign finance.
Simon & Schuster announced Tuesday that Kennedy’s “Life and Law: The Early Years” and “Life and Law: The Court Years” will be published Oct. 1, as a boxed set and in individual editions, each around 320 pages. Kennedy was widely regarded as a moderate conservative who wrote the majority opinion on such closely divided cases as Obergefell v. Hodges, which found a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, and Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which allowed corporations and other outside entities to spend unlimited money on election campaigns.
“In ‘Life and Law,’ he explains the why’s and how’s of judging,” Simon & Schuster’s announcement reads in part.
“The second volume is filled with moving portraits of Justices O’Connor, Rehnquist, Scalia and Ginsburg that go along with the account of how Kennedy decided his views in the landmark cases. But it is the first volume about his youth in Sacramento and his decade as a practicing lawyer that explains the judicial giant. Readers will see the child who turns into the man, who shaped America as much as any Washington figure in the 21st century.”
Kennedy, 87, noted in the preface to the first volume that his memoirs proved more expansive than originally planned.
“It was my intent (my right hand is raised to swear it so) to recount my earlier years in a summary way. But something happened on the way to the pencil,” he wrote. “More and more of my recollections turned to how our society and its mindset changed in fascinating ways from the ’40s and ’50s to the ’60s and then again in the ’70s. This seemed relevant to the dynamics that influenced me and our larger society.”
“As each day passes, we should strive to learn more about who we are and whom we should strive to become,” he added. “Writing a memoir is a formal way to do this.”
Kennedy was an associate justice from 1988-2018 and his arrival and departure proved equally newsworthy.
He was appointed to the court by President Ronald Reagan, but only after the Senate had voted down Reagan’s first choice, Robert Bork, and after the second choice, Douglas Ginsburg, withdrew amid reports he had smoked marijuana. When Kennedy announced in 2018 that he was stepping down, President Donald Trump nominated a former Kennedy law clerk, Brett Kavanaugh, who was narrowly approved by the Senate after contentious confirmation hearings that included allegations Kavanaugh had assaulted a high school acquaintance, Christine Blasey Ford.
Kennedy’s book will arrive soon after Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s memoir “Lovely One,” which comes out Sept. 3.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Illinois high court hands lawmakers a rare pension-overhaul victory
Headline Legal News |
2024/01/20 17:40
|
The Illinois Supreme Court on Friday endorsed the consolidation of local police and firefighter pension systems, a rare victory in a yearslong battle to find an answer to the state’s besieged retirement accounts.
The court’s unanimous opinion rejected claims by three dozen working and retired police officers and firefighters from across the state that the merger of 649 separate systems into two statewide accounts violated the state constitution’s guarantee that benefits “shall not be diminished or impaired.”
For years, that phrase has flummoxed governors and legislatures trying to cut their way past decades of underfunding the retirement programs. Statewide pension systems covering teachers, university employees, state employees, judges and those working for the General Assembly are $141 billion shy of what’s been promised those current and retired workers. In 2015, the Supreme Court overturned lawmakers’ money-saving overhaul approved two years earlier.
Friday’s ruling, which does not affect pension programs in Cook County, which includes Chicago, deals with a law Gov. J.B. Pritzker signed in late 2019 intended to boost investment power and cut administrative spending for hundreds of municipal funds. The Democratic governor celebrated the unusually good pension news.
“We ushered in a new era of responsible fiscal management, one aspect of which has been consolidating over 600 local pension systems to increase returns and lower fees, reducing the burden on taxpayers,” Pritzker said in a statement.
It would appear to be working. As of 2021, the new statewide accounts together had a funding gap of $12.83 billion; a year later, it stood at $10.42 billion, a decline of 18.7%.
Additionally, data from the Firefighters’ Pension Investment Fund shows that through June 2023, the statewide fund had increased return value of $40.4 million while saving, through June 2022, $34 million in investment fees and expenses.
But 36 active and former first responders filed a lawsuit, claiming that the statewide arrangement had usurped control of their retirement benefits. They complained the law violated the pension-protection clause because they could no longer exclusively manage their investments, they no longer had a vote on who invested their money and what risks they were willing to take, and that the local funds had to pay for transitioning to the statewide program.
The court decreed that none of those issues concerned a benefit that was impaired. Beyond money, the pension-protection law only covers a member’s ability to continue participating or to increase service credits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Headline Legal News for You to Reach America's Best Legal Professionals. The latest legal news and information - Law Firm, Lawyer and Legal Professional news in the Media. |
|
|
