Robinson v. California :: 370 U.S. 660 :: Justia US Supreme Court Center
Footnote 9]. Not only may addiction innocently result from the use of medically prescribed narcotics, but a person may even be a narcotics addict from the moment of his birth. Apart from prohibiting specific acts such as the purchase, possession and sale of narcotics, California has taken certain legislative steps in regard to the status of being a narcotic addict – a condition commonly recognized as a threat to the State and to the individual. Where narcotic addiction has progressed beyond the incipient, volitional stage, California provides for commitment of three months to two years in a state hospital. The majority’s error is in instructing the California Legislature that hospitalization is the only treatment for narcotics addiction – that anything less is a punishment denying due process.
I do not consider appellant’s conviction to be a punishment for having an illness or for simply being in some status or condition, but rather a conviction for the regular, repeated or habitual use of narcotics immediately prior to his arrest and in violation of the California law. California is entitled to have its statute and the record so read, particularly where the State’s only purpose in allowing prosecutions for addiction was to supersede its own venue requirements applicable to prosecutions for the use of narcotics and in effect to allow convictions for use. In my opinion, on this record, it was within the power of the State of California to confine him by criminal proceedings for the use of narcotics or for regular use amounting to habitual use. The Court clearly does not rest its decision upon the narrow ground that the jury was not expressly instructed not to convict if it believed appellant’s use of narcotics was beyond his control. It is significant that, in purporting to reaffirm the power of the States to deal with the narcotics traffic, the Court does not include among the obvious powers of the State the power to punish for the use of narcotics.
The Court has not merely tidied up California’s law by removing some irritating vestige of an outmoded approach to the control of narcotics. I cannot believe that the Court would forbid the application of the criminal laws to the use of narcotics under any circumstances. I fail to see why the Court deems it more appropriate to write into the Constitution its own abstract notions of how best to handle the narcotics problem, for it obviously cannot match either the States or Congress in expert understanding.
Former Ohio Resident Found Not Guilty for Rape, Kidnapping in Unusual 13 Year Old Case
On June 8, 2018, a Delaware County, Ohio jury returned a verdict that finally put an end to a 13 year old criminal case against a former resident. Our client, Wesley Paul Hadsell, 39, was found not guilty on all four felony charges brought against him dating back to 2005, including two counts of rape, kidnapping and felonious assault. Hadsell was found guilty of a lesser, misdemeanor charge of assault and sentenced to 6 months in jail, which was less than his time served. Apart from being 13 years in the making, the Hadsell case and its court proceedings were nothing short of unusual. Hadsell was originally indicted on the charges in 2005, but that case was dismissed after Hadsell was indicted on federal charges elsewhere.
The legal team at The Law Office of Brian Jones, which included visiting co-counsel, attorney Maxwell Hiltner, protected that right, verifying that the jurors selected had not been exposed to information about the case that may make them impartial in considering only the evidence that was presented at trial. In this case, one prospective juror admitted to using Google on his phone to search the case when he read our client’s name on the docket that morning. The majority of physical evidence and recorded statements gathered by the Delaware Police Department in 2005 had been destroyed, leaving both the prosecution and the defense to make their case predominately with witness testimony, 13 years after the date of the alleged incident. The defense uncovered that most of the DPD witnesses did not remember critical details of the case. When you’re relying on witness testimony, it’s rather important that they can remember the details of the case in question.
At the end of the proceedings, which lasted a total of four days, the jury determined that the State had not met their burden of proof in finding Hadsell guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and returned a verdict that, in essence, brought to end a 13 year old charge. Our client was potentially facing 30 years in jail, but he was found not guilty on all four felony charges, and the case concluded with the sentence of time served – a victory for our client and one more for The Law Office of Brian Jones.
U.S. Supreme Court cites Florida inheritance law in unusual case
The U.S. Supreme Court recently handed down its decision in the case of Astrue v. Capato. When Florida resident Robert Capato was diagnosed with esophogeal cancer, he and his wife Karen were concerned that chemotherapy might leave him sterile. Karen then underwent in-vitro fertilization while living in Florida, using her late husband’s stored sperm.
The only beneficiaries mentioned in his will are his wife Karen; the child they conceived when he was alive; and his children from a prior marriage. Therein is the problem: According to Florida law, children conceived after a parent’s death cannot inherit from the parent, unless they are referred to in the parent’s Will. The Supreme Court got involved because Karen attempted to claim Social Security Survivor Benefits for the twins. The case then went to the Circuit Court of Appeals, which reversed the decision, and found its way to the Supreme Court. The Justices ruled unanimously that the twins are not eligible for survivor benefits because the federal government – i.e, the Social Security Administration – must base its decisions upon each state’s own inheritance laws.
Even though Karen actually gave birth to the twins in New Jersey, they were conceived in Florida, and thus, Florida intestacy laws apply. Mr. Karp is the founder of The Karp Law Firm, a South Florida law firm with offices in Palm Beach Gardens, Boynton Beach and St. Lucie, Florida. Mr.
Karp was named a 2011 SuperLawyer by SuperLawyer Magazine and a member of the 2011 Florida Legal Elite by Florida Trend Magazine. He is admitted to practice law in New York as well as Florida.