Criminal

July 23rd, 2019 by Rieders Travis in Criminal

PREEMPTION-CRIMINAL LAW Kansas v. Garcia, 2020 U.S. LEXIS 1511 (March 3, 2020) Alito, J.  Kansas criminal law is not preempted by federal law dealing with immigration, the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986.  The fact that there may be overlap does not support the case for preemption.  There is no suggestion that the Kansas prosecutions frustrated any federal interest.  The possibility that federal enforcement priorities might be upset is not enough to provide a basis for preemption.  The supremacy clause gives priority to the laws of the United States, not the criminal law enforcement priorities or preferences of federal officers.  The mere fact that state laws like Kansas overlap to some degree with federal criminal provisions does not even begin to make a case for conflict preemption.   Drivers with Multiple DUI Offenses in Pennsylvania Drivers who repeatedly drive while intoxicated, even after getting multiple DUI convictions, put themselves and others at risk. Drunk driving is a major cause of car crashes that kill and maim people throughout Pennsylvania.  In 2017, the department of transportation (PennDOT) recorded 12,040 crashes where a driver was suspected of being impaired, a 2.1…

MALICIOUS PROSECUTION-FALSE ARREST

April 30th, 2018 by Rieders Travis in Criminal

Alleyne v. Pirrone, 2018 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 90 (March 9, 2018) Brobson, J. Detective George Pirrone (Detective Pirrone), Detective James Pitts (Detective Pitts), and Lieutenant Philip Riehl (Lieutenant Riehl) (collectively, Appellants) of the Philadelphia Police Department appeal from an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County (trial court). Following a trial, a jury found all three defendants liable to Kareem Alleyne (Alleyne) for malicious prosecution and found Detective Pirrone and Lieutenant Riehl liable to Alleyne for false arrest. Appellants appeal from the trial court’s denial of their motion for judgment notwithstanding the jury’s verdict. For the reasons set forth below, we reverse. On April 20, 2016, the jury returned a verdict favorable to Alleyne and awarded him damages in the amount of $1,030,250. The jury found all three Appellants—Detective Pitts, Detective Pirrone, and Lieutenant 25 Riehl—liable for malicious prosecution. The jury determined that only Detective Pirrone and Lieutenant Riehl were liable for false arrest. Alleyne very effectively defended against the criminal charges he faced by highlighting serious holes and inconsistencies in the Police Department’s investigation. While the improprieties by Appellants significantly hindered the criminal case against Alleyne,…