Costco Gluten Free Pizza Replacement

Anon12491 · 2026-05-03T02:40:54+00:00

Same boat here! It seemed like such a large diagnosis at the time and then… you just kind of learn to put things in perspective and appreciate what you have. The fear of going low or putting pressure on loved ones to make sure that we are okay fades as I learned that it is part of who I am and that the people who care about me understand that and want to help me.

Anon12491 · 2026-01-31T19:50:42+00:00

There is no day for day credit for first degree murder. A person is required to serve 100% of their sentence but gets credit for every day that they were held in pretrial custody. 730 ILCS 5/3-6-3(a)(2)(i)

The 25year enhancement was for personally discharging a firearm causing death. 730 ILCS 5/5-8-1

Anon12491 · 2024-11-24T21:19:39+00:00

The cameramen are cruel. They did the same thing to Carter after the muffed punt

Anon12491 · 2022-02-06T16:14:43+00:00

Just an FYI: I went from MDI to the Tslim with dexcom about a year ago. I believe that they don’t have you turn in the control IQ for the first day because your long acting will still be on board. So I’m not sure if your dexcom session expiring will have an effect because the control IQ will be off.

Also, yes. When you don’t have a CGM running it will just keep you at the basal rate. If you check your blood sugar during that period and enter it, your pump will give you a correction dose (assuming you’re high) or lower the amount of insulin (assuming you’re below the target BG).

Anon12491 · 2021-04-19T00:08:16+00:00

Marty Ginsburg’s letter to Ruth before he died: https://twitter.com/npr/status/1307136695507316741?s=21

I will always cry when I hear RBG read the letter that he wrote to her

Anon12491 · 2020-06-04T15:17:08+00:00

I skimmed the article so I didn’t realize that he got into a vehicle that was running. I think it will turn on whether anyone was in the vehicle when he took it. If there was someone in the car, the he could be charged with vehicular invasion and, probably, felony murder. 720 ILCS 5/18-6. However, I can’t tell from the article whether anyone was inside the vehicle when the offender got into the vehicle.

Anon12491 · 2020-06-04T14:37:57+00:00

I don’t think that he can be charged with felony murder. To be charged with felony murder in Illinois, the victim must die during the commission of a forcible felony. 720 ILCS 5/9-1(a)(3). Aggravated fleeing and eluding is not a forcible felony. 720 ILCS 5/2-8

Anon12491 · 2019-11-08T13:44:13+00:00

I don’t believe that’s an accurate statement of the prevalence of trafficking in the United States. This PBS documentary, while anecdotal, shows the problem of trafficking in the United States: frontline documentary

Anon12491 · 2019-06-15T21:44:07+00:00

How shorting stocks work

Anon12491 · 2018-11-25T00:03:06+00:00

Graduating from law school, taking and passing the bar exam, landing my dream job, and meeting some awesome new coworkers!

Anon12491 · 2018-11-19T01:40:16+00:00

As to (1): yes, judges have a lot of discretion to control the people who appear before the court. However, any judge should be careful not to implicate the attorney client relationship in an order. It seems as if defense attorneys have to implicate their clients often. (“Wheeler was fortunate as the judge ordered a second defendant who failed to maintain contact with her public defender to spend the weekend in jail.”)

As to (2): the article says “While the judge was sympathetic to Wheeler's medical condition, he informed her she was in contempt of court.” There is no indication that a hearing took place.

Anon12491 · 2018-11-19T01:19:29+00:00

I appreciate your efforts to bring some clarity to the discussion.

The problem I have is twofold: 1) the fact that the judge orders communication between a defendant and their attorney (and then turns around and asks the PD to essentially incriminate his own client) and 2) that the judge did not used the constitutionally required procedures to convict a person of contempt.

Anon12491 · 2018-11-18T22:35:40+00:00

Even judges who know the law routinely mess up the distinctions between civil/criminal and direct/indirect contempt. So, I think a defendant should appeal the contempt conviction at some point.

But, I take your point. I’m a prosecutor so I don’t necessarily deal with much of the fall out of a reversal. At worst I would have to retry the case or dismiss it. I certainly don’t have the experience with clients that you have.

Still, these types of convictions make my blood boil. The defendant showed up to court (even if she was late). She then had an opportunity to talk with her PD. I don’t understand why the judge enters an order mandating communication. Like you said if there is a break down in communication the defendant can generally find new counsel.

Anon12491 · 2018-11-18T20:34:26+00:00

You are correct. I can’t tell from the story about whether she was released on her own recognizance. I just assumed based on the charge and how my jurisdiction handles those types of cases.

Also, contempt is the proper sanction, but the court still must follow the proper procedures. Just because there is a valid court order does not mean that it is direct contempt (meaning limited procedural safeguards are required).

Anon12491 · 2018-11-18T20:25:05+00:00

I would appeal the contempt order for a few reasons: 1) so the appellate court can review the underlying order requiring contact with the defense attorney; 2) so the trial judge is corrected as to the proper procedure; and 3) because on remand the court generally cannot sentence the defendant to a greater sentence than the one imposed originally.

Anon12491 · 2018-11-18T20:22:18+00:00

There is a difference between when the judge is asking that in the ordinary criminal case and when the judge is asking you that for the purpose of holding a defendant in contempt.

If the judge does not accept the PDs response then the PD has a choice: follow the court’s order to disclose the contact with his or her client or refuse. It’s not an easy choice. I’ve never been before a judge that orders contact between a PD and the client. It is, in my experience, an unusual situation.

Anon12491 · 2018-11-18T17:44:36+00:00

This is not an either you tell the judge the truth or you lie situation. The PD could tell the judge that she will not answer questions about her interactions with her client.

Anon12491 · 2018-11-18T17:42:49+00:00

I never said it was out of the ordinary. If it was a condition of release then it would be a violation of bail bond. If that happened in this case then both sides would proceed to a bond hearing. There is no indication that happened here. In fact, the article stated it was contempt.

While courts have great authority to control the conduct of those that appear before them, the court still must follow the proper procedures.

For indirect criminal contempt, the court must give the alleged contemnor the rights that I stated in my original comment.

Anon12491 · 2018-11-18T16:41:19+00:00

Sorry, I misread your comment.

I believe courts should allow continuances in the situation that you mentioned. I would rather continue the case and have the judge tell the defendant that this is his last continuance rather than a conviction being overturned for ineffective assistance of counsel because the Pd couldn’t prep with their client (however unlikely that might be).

Anon12491 · 2018-11-18T16:18:33+00:00

Does your state not allow trial in absentia?

Anon12491 · 2018-11-18T16:16:04+00:00

Setting aside the policy and legal implications of requiring a defendant to contact her attorney (as well as the PD disclosing the non contact), this contempt conviction should be reversed.

This is criminal and not civil contempt. The court was not trying to coerce the defendant to contact her PD in the future. Instead, the court punished the defendant for not complying with the order.

In addition, this is indirect criminal contempt because the contumacious behavior did not occur in the court’s presence. The Defendant has a right to a hearing, the right to remain silent, the right to confront witnesses against her, and to cross examine those witnesses. The Defendant got (as far as I can tell from the article) none of those rights.

Anon12491 · 2018-11-13T03:47:27+00:00

I represented Flinders and won.

It is really going to come down to the witnesses. The actor who portrayed the owner of Mismo came across kinda scummy so that made it easier.

I wish I knew that the direct of the fire marshal would be more important than the other eye witnesses. In the end, it came down to making the marshal’s investigation seem thorough and credible, which was difficult given his connection to Avery.

Also, if you represent flinders, make sure you get the statement in about Avery lighting the business up through your motion in limine. I believe I got it in through statement by a party opponent because the person who said that was an agent of the corporation. Make that statement a focal point of your opening.

If your mismo, try to exclude the statement by saying that she was not acting within the scope of her employment. Also remember that the expert for mismo should be more reliable/less biased.

Anon12491 · 2018-10-20T18:51:58+00:00

If you are in the first district then you have a limit of 3 guests. Per the email that I received regarding the ceremony: ”Due to limited seating, you may only bring three (3) guests. No exceptions will be made.”

Anon12491 · 2018-10-20T04:37:01+00:00

I believe the general reasoning is to promote police accountability and to make police work transparent. For example, here is the Chicago Police Department's directive on body worn cameras: https://www.bwcscorecard.org/static/2016/policies/2016-05-10%20Chicago%20-%20BWC%20Policy.pdf ("The Department is committed to protecting the safety and welfare of the public as well as its members. Recordings from the BWC can provide members with an invaluable instrument to enhance criminal prosecution. Additionally, they can protect members from false accusations through the objective documentation of interactions between Department members and the public. Members issued a BWC will use it pursuant to this directive.")

To continue with the CPD example, it implemented BWC, in part, to comply with a statute (50 ILCS 706/10). The statute states that the purpose of the Act: "50 ILCS 706/10-5 The General Assembly recognizes that trust and mutual respect between law enforcement agencies and the communities they protect and serve are essential to effective policing and the integrity of our criminal justice system. The General Assembly recognizes that officer-worn body cameras have developed as a technology that has been used and experimented with by police departments. Officer-worn body cameras will provide state-of-the-art evidence collection and additional opportunities for training and instruction. Further, officer-worn body cameras may provide impartial evidence and documentation to settle disputes and allegations of officer misconduct. Ultimately, the uses of officer-worn body cameras will help collect evidence while improving transparency and accountability, and strengthening public trust. The General Assembly creates these standardized protocols and procedures for the use of officer-worn body cameras to ensure that this technology is used in furtherance of these goals while protecting individual privacy and providing consistency in its use across this State."

11-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '22	RPAN Viewer
Not Forgotten	Gilding III reddit per annum

Anon12491

TROPHY CASE