Justices Reject Local Law on Sex Offenders

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court says a 2007 Allegheny County ordinance that bars sex offenders from living in certain areas is invalid. The ordinance banned registered sex offenders from living within 2,500 feet of schools, child-care facilities, community centers and public parks.
Chief Justice Ronald Castille wrote a strongly-worded opinion on behalf of a unanimous high court and said this law would force many to live in isolated areas that in effect become "localized penal colonies."
Witold "Vic" Walczak, legal director for the ACLU of Pennsylvania, says "while places that have passed these ordinances may effectively exclude sexual offenders, the end result is that it's going to funnel these folks into certain other communities and people in those communities aren't going to be too happy."

The high court said the county ordinance is preempted by the state's Megan's Law registration and state policies that promote rehabilitation.

Walczak says he has no doubt that Allegheny County Council members who passed the ordinance were well-intentioned but you have to "look at the big picture" because ultimately these laws are not in the best interest of the community. "In fact they undermine public safety by making it more difficult for sex offenders to re-integrate into the community and be rehabilitated."

The State Supreme Court's opinion stems from a federal lawsuit filed on behalf of several sex offenders. The county appealed federal judge's 2009 ruling striking down the ordinance. The 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals then sought the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's input.

Emergency Physicians Want Protection from Liability

Emergency Medicine physicians are gathered in Washington this week calling on their representatives in Congress to approve medical liability reform.
53% of emergency room doctors who were surveyed said the main reason they conduct the number of test they do is fear of being sued. The survey by the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) was released in time for the Washington meetings. ACEP President Sandra Schneider said medical liability reform is essential to meaningful health car reform and without the reform, health care costs will continue to rise. The organization estimates the cost of "defensive medicine" range from $60 billion to $151 billion per year.
Dr. Daniel Wehner, chair of Emergency Medicine for the Connemaugh Health System, says legislation in the House includes protection from liability for emergency physicians like public health providers have. Wehner says emergency doctors are required by federal law and emergency care is considered high risk for malpractice suits because patients are more seriously ill or injured and physicians often don't have access to their medical histories.
Wehner says it would also be more reasonable to hear malpractice suits in special panel courts..."instead of a jury of 12 lay people deciding upon whether medicine was practiced appropriately, to have some scientists aboard on that panel, physicians or other people with some experience in dealing with scientific logical reasoning to decide whether or not there was liability on the part of the physician."

Last week the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts released data that shows in 2010 the number of medical malpractice lawsuits filed in the state dropped for a sixth straight year...down 45.4% since the base years of 2000-02. Those base years were just prior to 2 major rule changes made by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court: attorneys have to obtain from a medical professional a certificate that established the medical procedures in a case fell outside acceptable standards; and, medical lawsuits can only be brought in the county where the alleged malpractice occurred.

State Supreme Court Chief Justice Ronald Castille says progress has been made..."One of our fundamental priorities is to assure the Commonwealth's citizens that the legal process will not be abused in malpractice cases. We're very encouraged by these statistics. The crisis is over."

Appellate Court Race Very Close

The Democratic race for Commonwealth Court could be headed for a recount. The decision on whether or not to re-tally votes will be made next week, when counties submit official returns to the Department of State.

603,801 Democratic voters supported either Katheryn Boockvar or Barbara Ernsberger in Tuesday's Pennsylvania Primary. Speaking Wednesday afternoon, Secretary of the Commonwealth Carol Aichele explained just how slim Boockvar’s unofficial 50.3 to 49.8 percent lead is. “Right now, as of about an hour ago, the difference between the two candidates was 2,794 votes, which is within the half of the one percent,” she said.

If the difference between the two candidates stays less than a half a percentage point once counties certify the results next week, Aichele will announce an automatic recount, unless the trailing candidate waives her right for another tally.

The effort would be expensive, with an estimated cost of more than $500,000. “I have been through a recount in Chester County, as the county commissioner,” explained Aichele. “And we went over in many cases, provisional ballots ballot by ballot. So it’s labor-intensive.” DOS assumes each ballot box would cost about $50 to count. With more than 9,000 precincts throughout Pennsylvania, the cost would add up quickly.

Last year’s Democratic Lieutenant Governor primary and the 2009 Superior Court election both fell within the half-percent margin, but both times, challengers conceded and waived their right to a recount.

Pay Court Fees or Don't Drive

A Pennsylvania State Senator wants people to pay their court fees before their vehicle registration would be renewed. Mike Stack (D-Philadelphia) has authored legislation (SB 836) that would require individuals who owe the Court of Common Pleas fees and fines to pay up before the Department of Motor Vehicles okays the registration. Stack says this policy would help close the gap in the Commonwealth's $4 billion deficit.

"By simply collecting these $1.6 billion in unpaid fees, fines, restitution payments, we could cut the deficit nearly in half. We could potentially completely restore basic education funding all without raising taxes."

Stack explains how the policy would work if implemented.

"Once a person pays their fines, surcharges, fees or penalties, the court would send a written or electronic notification to PennDot that the individual has paid. Then, PennDot would renew the person's vehicle registration."

Philadelphia Municipal Court is owed $205.7 million and Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas is due more than $97 million.
The legislation is currently in the Senate Transportation Committee. A similar bill has been introduced in the House.

PA Courts Face Big Budget Gap

The Pennsylvania courts system predicts a $47 million budget shortfall for the next fiscal year, coming on top of a current $12 million funding gap.

In the "State of the Commonwealth's Courts 2011," the Supreme Court highlights what it calls six years of inadequate funding.

Courts system spokeswoman Amy Kelchner says the problem is that most judiciary funding pays judges' salaries, and those positions and pay rates are set by state law.

Kelchner says over the past six years, the judiciary has saved $17 million by leaving vacant judge positions unfilled, implementing a hiring freeze, and renegotiating contracts.

Kelchner says a court fee was passed several years ago to help fund the system, but that measure has sunset and isn't coming back.

"The courts should not be funded on fees. You should not restrict people's access to the court system to fund the courts. We really do believe the courts should be funded through the General Fund monies that come in, and the courts take up less than one-half of one percent of the state budget."

Kelchner says the judiciary has used money set aside for its computer system to pay for operating costs, but those funds will be gone by next year.

New Benchbook Will Set Pars for Sex Crime Cases

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has released a new manual to help state District Court judges in sex crime cases.

Supreme Court Justice J. Michael Eakin says the “benchbook” is an update of a 2007 version for Common Pleas judges, compiling newer standards and ‘best practices’ for judges taking part in sexual offense cases.

Eakin says the new book updates sexual assault definitions, addresses practical aspects (such as setting bail), and includes resources and references on sexual assault and rape crisis centers.

“There are sensitivities and intricacies in sexual assault cases that are unique to it, and this was an effort to give the front line courts something to help them recognize issues and deal with the things that are unique to this type of crime,” says Eakin.

Eakin says the Benchbook Advisory Committee that crafted the manual included a mix of prosecutors, defense attorneys, researchers, and other practitioners to ensure there was no bias toward either the victim or the accused.

Superior Court Judge Jack Panella was the book’s principal author; he also wrote the 2007 version for Common Pleas Courts.

Vets Court Gets Boost

A joint effort between the commonwealth and the U-S Department of Veterans Affairs to provide vets with access to a court system and health services when they get into legal trouble is set to expanding statewide.

Like the mental health and drug courts, the Pennsylvania Veterans Justice Program will find veterans in trouble with the law and provide them with social services. Tony Coppola is a Vietnam War vet from Pittsburgh who has benefited from the program in Allegheny County. When he was arrested for drunk driving, he was put on probation and treated for drinking problem. He says without the program he may not be alive now. “They teach you things and being with all veterans, it helped me out quite a bit,” says Coppola.

State Supreme Court Justice Seamus McCaffery was instrumental in bringing the alternative to jail time to Pennsylvania. He says it's also a cost saving measure for local governments because it takes veterans off their court dockets. “They take these people, they're diverted out of the court, given over to the VA. Whatever their needs may be, the Veterans Administration comes in with federal dollars and takes care of that individual to allow him to get back into society,” says McCaffery.

More than 650 vets have gone through the program since its inception in 2009. It's currently up and running in Allegheny, Lackawanna and Philadelphia counties. The Pennsylvania Justice Program is a joint effort between the state and the federal government.

Listen to a story produced by WDUQ as the Veterans Court was launching in Allegheny County.

High Court Rules Against Mt. Lebanon Family

A Pittsburgh area family has lost its case before the U.S. Supreme Court over the side-effects from a childhood vaccine.. Russell and Robalee Bruesewitz of Mt. Lebanon sued the drug maker Wyeth in a state court over the health problems they claim their daughter Hannah, who is now 19, suffered as a result of Wyeth's Tri Immunol diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus vaccine.
The couple says their daughter experienced seizures after receiving the 3rd of 5 doses of the vaccine as a baby. The Bruesewitz's say Wyeth should have sold a safer vaccine that was available. By a 6-2 vote today, the high court ruled that a 1986 law preempts such claims. Under that law, vaccine makers fund a limited compensation program for vaccine injuries. In return, the manufacturers cannot be sued.
The Bruesewitz's challenged that law saying the vaccine was defective and a safer one was available. The family says Hannah will need care her entire life.
Writing for the court, Justice Antonin Scalia said the law sets up a special vaccine court to provide compensation without driving drug manufacturers from the vaccine market. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor dissented. Justice Elena Kagan did not take part in the ruling. This decision seems to block lawsuits from families who claim that vaccines are to blame for autism in their children.

Orie Trial to Move Forward

Jury selection is scheduled to proceed this morning in Allegheny County Common Pleas Court in the corruption trial of Pennsylvania State Senator Jane Orie. The Republican lawmaker from McCandless Township and her sister Janine Orie are accused of using the senator's offices and staff to do campaign work for another sister, State Supreme Court Justice Joan Orie Melvin.

Melvin, a Superior Court Judge at the time, was elected to the Supreme Court in 2009. She has not been charged.

Monday Superior Court rejected a defense challenge to a ruling by Common Pleas Judge Jeffrey Manning that allowed the case to continue. Also yesterday, the State Supreme Court turned down a request by the defense for a King's Bench review which would have bypassed the lower courts and had the Supreme Court examine the case.

Judge Manning earlier denied a defense request to bring in a jury from another county due to pre-trial publicity. Manning did say that no one from Orie's senatorial district could be chosen to sit on the jury.

Korbe Sentenced

The woman accused of killing an FBI agent pleaded guilty and was sentenced on Tuesday in U.S. District Court.

U.S. District Judge Terrence McVerry sentenced Christina Korbe to 15 years in jail on charges of voluntary manslaughter and discharging a firearm during the commission of a crime of violence. In 2008 Korbe shot Sam Hicks, an FBI agent who came to her house to arrest her husband on drug trafficking charges.

Korbe pled guilty on Tuesday morning in front of a packed courtroom. She read a tearful apology in which she asked for forgiveness from the Hicks family and blamed the FBI for what occurred.

After the plea and sentencing, Sam Hick’s widow Brooke said that the most important thing was that Christina Korbe took responsibility for her actions. She said listening to Korbe’s apology was difficult.

“I would say it’s the hardest thing I’ve ever done. To sit there and listen to the person who took him from me talk about how she feels. I just kept thinking about my son and what he’s missing and what he will never get. And it was extremely hard,” she said.

Judge McVerry suggested Korbe be placed in a prison close to Pittsburgh so her two young children can pay her regular visits.

PA Court to Admit African American Application for 1847

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court will try to right a 160-year-old wrong Wednesday morning when it admits George Vashon to the bar posthumously. After graduating from Oberlin College and then reading law with a prominent member of the Pittsburgh legal community, African American George Vashon applied in 1847 to be admitted to the Allegheny County bar. Longtime Pittsburgh Lawyer Wendell Freeland says that was before there was a standard test to become a member of the bar. Freeland says the lawyer under whom Vashon studied supported his application to the bar but Vashon was denied access because the judges decided that since freed slaves did not have the right to vote they could not be admitted to the bar. Vashon then left for New York where he was admitted to the bar. After the civil war, Vashon returned to Pittsburgh and in 1868 he again applied and was denied admission to the Allegheny County bar. Freeland notes that Vashon was admitted to the bar of the US Supreme Court just a few months later. “It shows how far behind Pennsylvania was at the time,” says Freeland.

After learning of Vashon’s story, Freeland asked the Pennsylvania Board of Law examiners to grant Vashon admission to the bar posthumously. The Board denied the request in 2007 saying it might set a president. Freeland then took his case directly to the PA Supreme Court and the fruits of his labor will be seen Wednesday morning when Chief Justice Ronald D. Castille will sign and present a Certificate of Admission on
behalf of the Court to the Vashon family, confirming Mr. Vashon's credentials, competency and good character to practice law in Pennsylvania. Freeland says he was trying to right a wrong. “This will be a great moment for Western Pennsylvania and all of Pennsylvania,” says Freeland. Freeland says he feels the court is in a unique position to hand out this type of justice. He says he knows of no others that were treated in the same manner as Vashon but he suspects there were others who have been swallowed up by history. Freeland says it is likely that there are similar stories in other states. In a written statement Chief Justice Castille says, “There is no question that denying George Vashon’s admission to the Bar in 1847 and again in 1868 was blatantly discriminatory. By granting this petition, our Court recognizes, and is sensitive to the fact, that those prior practices in the Commonwealth’s earlier history had a real effect on real people.”

The Supreme Court’s May 4th order admitted Vashon to the Pennsylvania Bar, stating that, “George B. Vashon possessed the necessary credentials, competency, and good character to practice law in Pennsylvania in 1847 based upon his bachelor and masters degrees from Oberlin College, his mentorship with the Honorable Walter Forward of the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas and his subsequent admissions to practice law in the State of New York and before the U.S. Supreme Court.”

A small group of Vashon’s decedents are to be in the courtroom and the judge will allow Freeland to introduce them. Freeland says he thinks the formality of the court will break down a bit at that time and he expects it will become a celebratory event.

Legislative Response to "Kids for Cash"

A measure expanding the scope of a statewide judicial advisory panel cleared the Pennsylvania House with unanimous support this week.
The bill was crafted in response to the Luzerne County “kids for cash” scandal, where two judges allegedly sent children to privately-run juvenile detention centers in exchange for kickbacks.
The measure provides more resources for the Juvenile Court Judges’ Commission (JCJC), which sets guidelines for Pennsylvania’s youth courts.
Sponsor Phyllis Mundy, a Luzerne County Democrat, says the legislation would give the Commission money and staff to collect more data from court systems, and to identify red flag trends, like increased incarceration rates for first-time offenders.

"So this bill would give them that authority. To collect the data statewide, analyze it and disseminate the information to interested parties who have a relationship to the court. And would be able to then say, this is inappropriate, what’s going on here?"

Mundy says the measure gives the Commission the resources it needs to track statewide data, and look for ‘red flag’ trends in juvenile court systems........."had they had access to the kind of information we’re talking about, and been able to disseminate that publicly, others would have been more aware and more apt to signal to legislators or to the governor’s office or to someone who could have been active in preventing the situation that occurred here."

Mundy says increased incarceration rates for first-time offenders and an uptick in the number of defendants going to trial without lawyers are two examples of data that could lead to investigations. Both of those trends shot up in Luzerne County during the time the judges were taking bribes.
It’s unclear whether the Senate will consider the measure.

Pennsylvania Judiciary Launches Interactive Access to Court Information

Since last week, a new feature on the Pennsylvania Judiciary website has a new web feature that makes it easier for people to interact with the Judiciary.

Visitors can access the Public Comments page by clicking on a box on the www.pacourts.us page and report a problem or submit a comment and receive a response from the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts. People can still fax or mail in their concerns and expect a response.

The Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts said they will honor all requests for confidentiality with the exception of requests that are referred to other agencies.

Steve Schell, Communications Coordinator for The Administrative Offices of Pennsylvania Courts says many of the requests that people have are for legal services. The Pennsylvania Judiciary does not provide legal services but makes referrals.

Law Dean: Kagan Better Prepared for High Court Than Some Current Members Were

Saying that no one can predict how a Supreme Court Justice will evolve, Ken Gormley, Dean of the Duquesne University School of Law, says he expects Elena Kagan to vote with the liberal wing of the high court but would be surprised if she were extreme in any way.
Gormley, who has known Kagan since she was Dean of the Harvard University School of Law, says Kagan is the "intellectual equal of anyone currently on the Supreme Court" and has "all the legal skills one would want in a Supreme Court Justice."
The Senate voted 63-37 to confirm U.S. Solicitor General to succeed retired Justice John Paul Stevens. Five Republicans joined all but one Democrat plus the two independents in supporting Kagan. Republicans argued that Kagan was a political liberal who would be unable to be impartial. Some also questioned the fact that she has no judicial experience. But Gormley says nearly 40% of all justices in the nation's history did not come from the judiciary.....
"Frankly (Kagan) having served as Solicitor General of the U.S. where you're working through the most difficult cases at the highest level of government has probably better experience for this job than having a year or two as an appellate judge."
Gormley notes that Chief Justice John Roberts had only a year or so on the federal appellate court level before being nominated for the Supreme Court.

Gormley added that this nomination did not result in a big confirmation showdown. He says that will happen if a conservative justice retires while President Obama is still in office and that would change the 5-4 ideological split and then "there will be a battle to the end."