Andrew Sanchez III, 60, is set to be booked in Bexar County Jail on one count of improper photography. A judge set bail at $7,500. Police said the officer assigned to the American Cheer Power Southern National Championship at the Alamodome saw Sanchez videotaping the performers around 11:30 a.m. Sunday. The officer questioned Sanchez and determined he had no children in the contest. (Chron.com.) Improper photography is

It is almost unfathomable to me that a lawyer would give up confidential client information without a fight. Yet Sam Glover at The Lawyerist suggests that this might be an option: "If you are the sort of person who would fight such a subpoena, this would give you the option to do so." The context: Glover is talking about using SpiderOak for file sync instead of Dropbox.

Business Insider found some folks who see revenge porn not as a free-speech issue but as "a kind of high tech rape": When we teach women not to walk alone in public after dark, not to wear particular kinds of clothing, not to engage in consensual acts like taking nude photos or making sex tapes, we're saying that women can expect to be victims because they are

Dylan Love at Business Insider (the article contains lots of bad legal advice) writes: There is a seedy underbelly of the internet where people post nude or otherwise compromising photos of their ex-girlfriends or boyfriends for anyone to see, sometimes to get back at a lover who jilted them. These so-called "revenge porn" sites bring up a number of questions. Why aren't they illegal? Why would they be? In

A commenter on this post asks: I do have a few questions on challenges for cause. Mostly, how are they resolved? Is it entirely about negotiation to consensus and good faith, or does the judge have complete discretion? Also, what happens if you don't have a large enough panel remaining for a strike zone of 32 (e.g. thirty nullificationists show up that day)? Do you just have

Experienced trial lawyers will often tell you that "jury selection" is misnamed—it's actually jury deselection.  Different jurisdictions use different methods. In a Texas non-capital felony trial, the jury panel is ordinarily sixty people. Each juror is assigned a number. The court brings the panel in to the courtroom and lines them up on the benches in numerical order—one through twelve on the first row, for example, thirteen through

Chris Daniel has a great idea (Chron.com) for broadening the jury pool: [T]here are ways for government, without being intrusive, to provide businesses with incentives to pay workers absent because of jury service. Lawmakers will consider passing House Bill 433, which would allow employers to claim a 15 percent discount when calculating their state margins taxes if they pay workers who are out for jury service. Employers don't

Ring. "This is Mark Bennett." "Hello, Mark, how are you doing today?" "I'm w—" "This is Glenn, with Xerox. I was just calling today because I thought you might be interested…" Glenn, you numbskull. The object of "how are you doing today" is to get me in "yes mode," responding to you positively in accordance with established social conventions, before you reveal that you're calling to try to

If a high-level federal bureaucrat wants you dead, you are dead. That is all you really need to need know of the Department of Justice's white paper on extrajudicial killing. Because once the executive branch claims authority to choose—secretly, uniramerally* and without review—whom to kill and where, it doesn't matter what legal justification it claims gives it that authority, and it doesn't matter what rules it claims

When Tim Cushing at TechDirt wrote about Teri Buhl's "unpublishable tweets" and her attempts to bully Gideon with lawsuit threats, then me with veiled threats of a libel lawsuit, Buhl left a comment: ("Jurno"?) Then she asked Jim Romenesko to post her response to the TechDirt article: I can say silly things some times and I’d like to apologized for my knee jerk reaction to Gideon. Of course