Due to the recent rash of NFL arrests, the ugly specter of domestic violence has once again been thrust into the forefront of America’s consciousness. The most effective weapon against domestic violence is EDUCATION.
This update will explore one very effective tool available to the court and will answer the following question:
When sentencing a defendant convicted of a domestic abuse offense, under what circumstances, should the court order (or accept) completion of an anger management program rather than a domestic abuse counseling program?
CLICK ON THE LINK BELOW TO READ MORE
CORRECTION – THIS UPDATE CONTAINS A SMALL CORRECTION TO THE PREVIOUS UPDATE – SEE PAGE 2, PARAGRAPH 4, UNDERLINED SECTION, DEALING WITH COURT APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEMS. PLEASE DISCARD THE PREVIOUS UPDATE DATED DECEMBER 3, 2012.
PREMISE: Family law motions are controlled by statute and the rules of family court procedure. Although most attorneys follow those rules, some do not. In order to effectively evaluate a family law motion there are 10 basic rules and judicial best practices that every judge should know:
QUESTION: What legal analysis should the court apply when asked to rule on the admissibility of an out-of-court statement?
ANSWER: If you have ever read “Alice in Wonderland” you would be wise to follow the King’s advice to the white rabbit and always “begin at the beginning.” In other words, when asked to rule on the admissibility of an out-of-court statement, instead of assuming the statement is hearsay and skipping directly to the hearsay exceptions (which is what most of us do), it is usually best to take a step back, go to the beginning and ask the threshold question: is this out-of-court statement really hearsay? The answer isn’t always clear. Many statements that initially appear to be hearsay, on closer examination, actually are not. In order to make that determination I suggest you apply the following FOOL-PROOF HEARSAY TEST.
CLICK ON LINK BELOW TO READ MORE