This is going to be a little shorter than usual. I didn't have phone or Internet service to my home this weekend, for reasons that AT & T can't quite explain. They assure me they'll fix the problem -- by Friday. Last Thursday I spent over an hour with a guy from Westlaw trying to figure out why it won't do the same things that Lexis will, and on Saturday I went out to eat and ordered the tuna medium rare, whereupon I was told that the cook only prepares it rare. Not that there's a problem with service in this country or anything.
So let's get to it. Two decisions from the Supreme Court last week, the first holding that a speeding ticket need not allege that the speed was unreasonable for conditions, the second reversing an 8th District decision and holding that a defendant in a civil case who asserts that he wasn't served properly doesn't waive that defense by participating in the litigation. I'd reviewed the oral arguments in the Supreme Court a couple months ago, and I talked about the problems with the appellate court's decision when it first came out, so reversal wasn't a surprise. On to the courts of appeals...
Several criminal decisions of note: 6th District gives a good summary of case law regarding advising a defendant of PRC at a plea hearing, holds that court's statement that defendant may have up to 5 years of PRC, when PRC was mandatory, was sufficient when coupled with written plea agreement that correctly advised defendant of term... 2nd District reverses trial court's grant of motion to suppress, holds that exigent circumstances permitted police to pursue defendant into house in drug arrest... 8th District reverses because trial court permitted detective to give opinion testimony as to witness' truthfulness... When cop stops car for expired plate and finds out that driver isn't owner, further intrusion of asking for driver's ID is "minimal," says 9th District... A LEADS report qualifies under the business records exception to the hearsay rule, 12th District holds, also reviews other court decisions on that subject.
In the only civil decision of note, the 8th District reaffirms that employment-at-will doctrine not overridden by employee handbook, also rejects promissory estoppel argument in wrongful discharge claim.
And from the Department of Cases I Never Finished Reading: the opening line in last week's decision by the 8th District in Dinucci v. Lis:
The case at bar stems from a dispute between neighbors involving the capture and eventual safe release of a house cat.