NEIL ROCKIND, P.C.

The FBI and some U.S. Attorneys’ offices around the country may be reading emails without a warrant, according to documents obtained by the ACLU and made public Wednesday.

The documents “paint a troubling picture of the government’s email surveillance practices,” wrote Nathan Freed Wessler, attorney with the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy and Technology Project, in a blog posting.

“Not only does the FBI claim it can read emails and other electronic communications without a warrant — even after a federal appeals court ruled that doing so violates the Fourth Amendment — but the documents strongly suggest that different U.S. Attorneys’ offices around the country are applying conflicting standards to access communications content,” he wrote.

The Fourth Amendment protects citizens against unreasonable searches and seizures.

“The documents we received from the FBI don’t flat out tell us whether FBI agents always get warrants, but they strongly suggest that they don’t.”

The ACLU obtained documents from the FBI and U.S. Attorneys’ offices via federal Freedom of Information Act requests.

The FBI told NBC News, via an emailed statement, that in “all investigations, the FBI obtains evidence in accordance with the laws and Constitution of the United States, and consistent with Attorney General guidelines.”

The bureau’s field offices “work closely with U.S. Attorney’s Office to adhere to the legal requirements of their particular districts as set forth in case law or court decisions/precedent.”

NBC News also contacted the Department of Justice for comment, and will update this post when we hear back.

Last month, the ACLU shared IRS Criminal Tax Division memos and manuals which indicated the agency is not always following a 2010 appellate court ruling that the government must obtain a warrant before ordering email providers to turn over messages. That information also was obtained through a FOIA request.

In a statement to NBC News then, the IRS did not directly address the ACLU’s concerns, but did say “Respecting taxpayer rights and taxpayer privacy are cornerstone principles for the IRS. Our job is to administer the nation’s tax laws, and we do so in a way that follows the law and treats taxpayers with respect.”

The ACLU said the FBI and U.S. Attorneys’ Office documents show “if nothing else” that “federal policy around access to the contents of our electronic communications is in a state of chaos. The FBI, the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, and DOJ Criminal Division should clarify whether they believe warrants are required across the board when accessing people’s email.”

The civil liberties organization is also pushing for passage of amendments to the federal Electronics Communication Privacy Act. The act was passed in 1986, before email and the Internet became part of everyday life.

The law, as now written, does not require the government to have a search warrant when requesting access to emails and messages more than 180 days old that are stored online. Such information can be gathered by obtaining a subpoena, which is easier to get than a warrant.

A bill by Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont — who authored the original ECPA bill 27 years ago — would update the law by requiring a search warrant if the government wants to read emails stored with third-party providers, such as Google or Yahoo.

It would also eliminate the 180-day rule and require the government to notify a person whose emails or other electronic communications have been disclosed, within 10 days of obtaining a search warrant. The bill is making its way through the Senate.

“When ECPA was enacted, email was primarily a means of communicating information, not storing it,” Leahy said in astatement. “Today, we use our email accounts as digital filing cabinets, where we store many of the personal documents and sensitive information that the Fourth Amendment was meant to protect. This bill takes an essential step toward ensuring that the private life of Americans remains private.”

via NBC News

I am not a big fan of Fox News, the cable network news station.  However, once in awhile a blind squirrel finds an acorn in the winter.  Here is a Fox News Poll showing public favor and support for marijuana as medicine.  The support is strong.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/interactive/2013/05/01/fox-news-poll-85-percent-voters-favor-medical-marijuana/

- Neil Rockind

A sometimes sobbing West Bloomfield grandmother told a packed courtroom she was sorry she had shot her teenage grandson to death, begging the judge not to give her a long prison sentence.

“I don’t want to die in jail or prison,” 75-year-old Sandra Layne cried Thursday in Oakland County Circuit Court. “Oh, God! Oh, God! I don’t know what to say. I am so sorry.”

But Judge Denise Langford Morris exceeded sentencing guidelines and ordered Layne, who had no criminal history, to spend 20-40 years in prison. She was convicted of second-degree murder last month for fatally shooting her grandson Jonathan Hoffman, 17, in Layne’s West Bloomfield condominium on May 18. Guidelines called for 12-20 years in prison.

The sentencing brought to a close a case that shocked metro Detroit, garnered national attention and tore apart a family already teetering on the edge.

“This is a tragic case for everyone involved,” Langford Morris said before announcing the sentence. “This is a tragedy for the community. Grandmothers are supposed to be protected, and grandmothers are supposed to protect.”

As the sentence was read, Layne turned to look at her daughter Jennifer Hoffman, Jonathan’s mother. Hoffman, who called her mother “pure evil,” smiled broadly and gave her mother a thumbs-up sign.

Layne, crying, turned away.

“There are a lot of questions in this case,” Langford Morris said. “How could this happen and why? What’s troubling is why you didn’t call the police first before you walked up the stairs, before you obtained the Glock in your hand. You could have called police.”

“Why did you keep shooting him, and how did you keep shooting him? You didn’t have to keep shooting him.”

Layne, testifying on her own behalf during the trial, had said she grew fearful of her grandson, bought a gun and used it weeks later during an argument with Jonathan, who was threatening to run away after testing positive for synthetic marijuana.

His divorced parents, Jennifer and Michael Hoffman, have pledged never to forgive Layne. At Thursday’s sentencing, Jennifer Hoffman’s voice trembled with rage when she told the court what the killing had done to her and Jonathan’s younger sister, Jessica.

“Now I will never know the man he would become, I will never see him graduate,” she said. “Now I have to celebrate his birthday at his grave site.”

She said she suffers from depression and is traumatized by the frantic 911 call her son made as his grandmother continued to shoot him.

“The 911 call plays endless inside my head,’’ she said. “The hardest part as a mother is knowing that he died in terror at the hands of a person he once loved and trusted.”

Michael Hoffman did not attend the sentencing, but submitted a statement read by Chief Assistant Prosecutor Paul Walton that said the killing turned his life upside down.

“My prison is every bit as confining as that (in) which Sandra Layne will soon be confined,” the statement said. “He was a gentle and loving soul. I miss my son every day.”

When asked whether she wanted to speak, Layne stood unsteadily in her orange jail jumpsuit, her once tinted red hair now fully gray and pulled into a ponytail. In a rambling, sometimes tearful statement, she told the judge she loved the boy and never intended to harm him.

“My relationship with my grandson was pure and simple. I loved him from the minute I held him in my arms,” she said.

She said she regretted allowing her grandson to live with her so that he could finish high school after his divorced parents moved to Arizona. She said she underestimated what it would take to care for the troubled teen, who was using drugs, becoming more violent and on probation at the time he was killed.

“If I could go back, I never would have let him come here, I would have said to his parents, ‘He’s your responsibility,’ ” she said.

The killing divided the family — and the courtroom. Jennifer Hoffman sat on the right with other family members and friends who want to see Layne die in prison. Layne’s husband, Fred Layne, 87, sat on the left, with Layne supporters. They left without talking to reporters.

Layne’s defense attorney, Jerome Sabbota,

said he was disappointed and pledged to appeal.

“Look, this is a death sentence for her,” he said. “She doesn’t deserve to die in prison.”

via Freep

Oakland County Prosecutor Jessica Cooper is criticizing the Lake Orion Police Department’s use of a 14-year-old boy in a March drug bust, calling it “extremely dangerous.”

“It’s something that’s ill-advised, something we think is dangerous,” Cooper said this week, noting that she does not dictate how police departments conduct their investigations.

Cooper said most of the undercover cases involving confidential informants involve adults, and this would be the youngest person used in such a case that’s she’s aware of.

“This young man’s going to have a terrible time, because now he’s not confidential anymore,” Cooper said. “You don’t know who you’re going up against.”

The boy’s father has filed a complaint with the Attorney General’s Office about his son’s involvement. The boy’s mother, who has full custody of the boy, allowed her son to take part in the sting because it was the most effective way of getting the man eventually charged in the case out of the boy’s life, according Lake Orion Police Chief Jerry Narsh.

Narsh defended the decision to use the boy, noting that these were unique circumstances.

Edward Watkins, the man arrested in the case, is a 35-year-old parolee with a lengthy criminal history. Narsh said Watkins was a father figure to a friend of the 14-year-old boy — he was living with that boy and his mother — and had been pressuring the 14-year-old boy to buy marijuana for quite some time. Narsh said the 14-year-old boy’s mother is a loving and caring person.

“This is not a normal narcotics investigation. However, the pressure that was being put on this boy by a trusted adult gave us grave concern” that he would be in as much or more danger by not proceeding with the sting, Narsh said, referencing the access the man had to the boy. “This is a predator who would attempt to get drugs into the hands of … young teens.”

Narsh said the sting was the surest way of getting the man off the street.

Watkins, who was from Southfield but had been living in Lake Orion for about a year, was arrested March 15, Narsh said. Watkins, who was charged with one count of marijuana deliver to a minor, a potential eight-year felony, is scheduled for a preliminary examination Monday at 52-3 District Court in Rochester Hills.

The boy arranged a buy at a parking lot near Children’s Park at Anderson and Front Streets, Narsh said. As the transaction played out, the boy’s mother watched from a nearby vehicle. The boy informed his mother of the pressure from Watkins the day of the sting, and she contacted police, Narsh said.

Narsh, who noted that children ages 12 and older are the fastest-growing segment of marijuana users, said he understands the concern of the prosecutor and the boy’s father but insisted that the use of the boy was the lesser of the dangers he faced.

“Drugs were dangerous, and this man’s influence in his life was dangerous … everything about adults trying to sell drugs to children was dangerous, and there was danger all around this boy,” Narsh said.

Watkins, who lists 10 aliases, has a criminal history dating at least to 1997 that includes charges of felonious assault, retail fraud and receiving and concealing a stolen motor vehicle, according to online state records.

via Freep