District of Columbia, September, 2005, State Case law

Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!

Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!

State Courts - District of Columbia - September 22 - September 29, 2005

Evans v. United States, No. 02-CF-1034, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, September 22, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: After considering alternatives of honoring or rejecting the request, court did not abuse its discretion in granting jury's request for a magnifying glass to examine fingerprints properly introduced into evidence. Even if it was error, it was harmless because jury did not immediately return guilty verdict and there was compelling evidence of guilt.

Search Cases for Free

Hector v. United States, Nos. 01-CM-1362 & 03-CO-1502, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, September 22, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: The inmate believed that the civil protection order (CPO) only restricted physical contact, not handwritten letters. Because there was insufficient evidence that the inmate was on notice of the restrictions contained in the CPO, the instant court reversed the decision to hold him in contempt for violating D.C. Code ?? 16-1004, -1005.

Search Cases for Free

In re Whitehead, No. 05-BG-787, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, September 22, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Attorney, whose misconduct was attributable to his addiction to alcohol, was ordered suspended from the practice of law for 60 days, but the suspension was stayed, and the attorney was placed on two years of probation with certain conditions; one of the conditions was that the attorney abstain from alcohol and non-prescription drugs.

Search Cases for Free

Johnson v. United States, Nos. 98-CF-1835 and 99-CF-27, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, September 22, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: In a carjacking and murder case, where a witness testified about the front-seat passenger's hearsay statement regarding the back-seat passenger's presence in the vehicle, where neither appellant testified, the Confrontation Clause error was harmless because there was ample evidence that the back-seat passenger was in the vehicle.

Search Cases for Free

Rogers v. Johnson-Norman, VSP2497-03, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, September 26, 2005, Decided , September 26, 2005, Filed
View this case - free

Overview: Because an ex-girlfriend unequivocally alleged that the underlying offense of stalking occurred in the District of Columbia, the trial court had jurisdiction to issue a civil protection order against her ex-boyfriend even though he had been acquitted in the criminal case.

Search Cases for Free

In re Gasch, No. 05-BG-850, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, September 29, 2005, Filed
View this case - free

Search Cases for Free

In re Mann, No. 03-BG-1138, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, September 29, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: In the reciprocal attorney disciplinary matter, although indefinite suspension was not a sanction specifically identified under D.C. Bar. R. XI, ? 3(a), the reviewing court imposed that sanction against the attorney for his misconduct in Maryland. There was a strong presumption favoring identical reciprocal discipline.

Search Cases for Free

In re Ras, No. 04-BG-341, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, September 29, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Because a lawyer's misconduct in Illinois also violated the District of Columbia's Rules of Professional Conduct, the court adopted the Board on Professional Responsibility's recommendation of reciprocal discipline by suspending the lawyer for one year with reinstatement conditioned upon proof of his fitness to resume the practice of law.

Search Cases for Free

Puckrein v. Jenkins, No. 02-CV-217, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, September 29, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Where appellee had a valid consent judgment, a trial court abused its discretion by reinstating the complaint in that action after appellants defaulted on the payments agreed to under the consent judgment since appellee had the remedies of enforcement under D.C. Super. Ct. R. Civ. P. 69 available to him.

Search Cases for Free

Communities Portal