Home Blog Page 31

Mock Luke Cage Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

0

Join us at San Diego Comic Con on July 20, 2017 at 800pm in Room 23ABC for Sweet Christmas! A Mock Trial to Prove Luke Cage is Innocent.

The mock hearing is based upon the ending of Marvel’s Luke Cage on Netflix. Luke was taken into custody by U.S. Marshals in New York City to be returned to Georgia for breaking out of the fictional Seagate Prison. We extrapolated what exculpatory evidence could be in the folder found at Pop’s Barbershop from the original Power Man comics from the 1970s: Diamondback had Luke framed for heroin possession.

Christine Peek, Esq., from McManis Faulkner in San Jose, California, appearing pro hac vice with the fictional Hogarth, Chao and Benowitz, LLP for our mock hearing, prepared the following petition to prove Luke Cage’s actual innocence:

Verified_Petition_for_Writ_of_Habeas_Corpus_Carl_Lucas_Luke_Cage

What will we learn from the testimony of Nicholas Manolis? How will U.S. Magistrate Judge Mitch Dembin rule on the petition? Join us on July 20 at 800pm to find out at Sweet Christmas! A Mock Trial to Prove Luke Cage is Innocent.

Please Nominate The Legal Geeks for the ABA Web 100

0

The ABA Journal has expanded the Blawg 100 to include social media and podcasts. We would appreciate your nominations for The Legal Geeks in the blog, podcast, and social media categories.

We started our blog in July 2012 to share our love of the law and geekdom. In the past year, we have been able to give other lawyers and law students the opportunity to share their geek love of the law, with guest posts, podcasts, and comic conventions. Thank you all who have joined us for the adventure.

To nominate The Legal Geeks, please visit the ABA Journal and tell them why you are a fan of our blog, podcast, and social media. Voting ends 11:59 p.m. CST July 30, 2017.

Your vote counts and is greatly appreciated.

Return of the Lawyer to San Diego Comic Con

0

Jessica and I started The Legal Geeks to share our love of comics, science fiction, and the law. We are thrilled to be returning to San Diego Comic Con for the third time and our fifth anniversary. I have presented over 450 legal seminars in my career and the most high profile ones have been at San Diego Comic Con. Our two panels this year have amazing judges and lawyers who love pop culture. We hope you can join us in San Diego for our Luke Cage Mock Trial and Judges on Star Wars.

Thursday, July 20, 2017 

800pm-900pm Sweet Christmas! A Mock Trial to Prove Luke Cage is Innocence

Marvel’s Luke Cage ended with Luke in FBI custody for breaking out of prison. Join us for a mock evidentiary hearing where attorneys will argue to US Magistrate Judge Mitch Dembin a writ of habeas corpus to prove Cage’s actual innocence.

Attorneys arguing the case include Christine Peek, Esq., McManis Faulkner, and Megan Smith, Esq., for Luke Cage (played by David Gibson); and Steve Chu, Esq., and Jane Boardman, Deputy City Attorney for the City of San Diego Office of The City Attorney, for the Government. Room 23ABC.

Friday, July 21, 2017

300pm-400pm Judges on Star Wars

Is the Dark Side an Addiction or choice for Kylo Ren? What are the Civil Rights of Droids? Did interrogating Bodhi Rook with the Bor Gullet violate Rook’s rights?

Join California Supreme Court Justice Mariano-Florentino Cuellar, Circuit Judge John B. Owens of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, Federal Magistrate Judge Mitch Dembin, Federal Magistrate Judge Stacie Beckerman, CA Judge Carol Najera, and former Federal Magistrate Judge Paul Grewal (now Deputy General Counsel of Litigation at Facebook), to hear their legal analysis, and love, of Star Wars. Moderated by Joshua Gilliland, Esq., and Jessica Mederson, Esq, of The Legal Geeks. Room 7AB.

If you are attending San Diego Comic Con, you can follow the links to our panels Sweet Christmas! A Mock Trial to Prove Luke Cage is Innocence and Judges on Star Wars to add them to your schedule.

Admissibility of Zhora’s Photo in Blade Runner

0

The 1982 classic Blade Runner posed a complex evidentiary issue: How could Leon’s photo of Zhora be admissible in court? Would the zoomed in image of Zhora be merely a duplicate from the original image? Or would expert testimony be needed to authenticate the image?

Blade Runner Rick Deckard used the ESPER machine in his apartment to pull an image from a reflection in a photo found in the hotel room of the Replicant Leon. The verbal commands to navigate the image were:

Enhance 224 to 176. Enhance, stop. Move in, stop. Pull out, track right, stop. Center in, pull back. Stop. Track 45 right. Stop. Center and stop. Enhance 34 to 36. Pan right and pull back. Stop. Enhance 34 to 46. Pull back. Wait a minute, go right, stop. Enhance 57 to 19. Track 45 left. Stop. Enhance 15 to 23. Give me a hard copy right there.

Blade Runner script

Deckard scanned in the original photo for analysis in the ESPER machine. As such, there is no metadata from the original photo, because it was a printed image, not an electronic one. However, there should be an audit log within the ESPER machine that documented the analysis of the photo.

Photographic evidence can be admissible in California if the photos properly authenticated. Evid. Code, §§ 250, 1401, subd. (a). Photos can be authenticated by the testimony of someone with personal knowledge of the photo when it was taken (they were in the photo or took the photo) or expert testimony if no one has personal knowledge of the photo. People v. Bowley (1963) 59 Cal.2d 855. More recent cases have explained that authentication for photos “may be supplied by other witness testimony, circumstantial evidence, content and location” and “also may be established ‘by any other means provided by law’ including a statutory presumption.“ People v. Goldsmith, 59 Cal.4th 258, p. 268 (Cal., 2014), citing CA Evid. Code § 1400.

Cases involving photos on social media and cell phones are helpful to authenticate the photo of Zhora recovered from the ESPER machine.

In a case from San Francisco, a police officer searched Instagram to monitor a person on probation. The officer saw photos of the person on probation, plus another who was a wanted felon, posing with guns on Instagram photos. The officers went to the known address of the individual on probation and made arrests of the two individuals. Both individuals were wearing the same clothes as in the photos. People v. K.B. (In re K.B.), 238 Cal.App.4th 989 (Cal. App., 2015).

While not stated if it was a search incident to arrest, the cell phone of one of the Defendants was forensically collected was a tool named Cellebrite. A report was offered to the Court stating images the exact time and date the photons that appeared on Instagram were taken. In re K.B, at *994-995.

The Court held that the investigating officers properly authenticated the photos, despite neither Defendant testifying to the authenticity of the photos. In re K.B, at *997-998. The officers had seen photos of the suspects on Instagram; the officers were familiar with the suspects; the suspects were wearing the same clothes in the photos when arrested; and the officers found the original photos on one of the suspect’s phones with forensic software that appeared on Instagram. All of these factors weighed in favor of properly authenticating the photos for admissibility.

Applying California Evidence Code Evid. Code § 1400 and recent case law, a Court could find the photo of Zhora with the ESPER machine to be admissible. The device scanned in the photo found in Leon’s hotel room and visually navigated the photo to find the image of Zhora. While some expert testimony would be necessary to explain how the ESPER machine operated, this is no different from explaining how forensic software such as Cellebrite operates. Moreover, as Deckard had the ESPER machine in his apartment, such technology might have been as commonplace as a Blu Ray player, which arguably would lower how much detail would need to be offered to explain how “common” technology operates. Furthermore, the audit log of the verbal commands should be offered to the Court, just as the report from Cellebrite, for the Court to understand how the image of Zhora was discovered in the original photo.

A Court would likely find the photos admissible…if Replicants had a right to a trial before being “retired.”

What was Dr. Palmer’s Duty to Treat Dr. Strange?

0

Dr. Christine Palmer in Doctor Strange found herself having to treat an injured Dr. Strange in an homage to The Oath. Just what is a doctor’s duty to treat an injured person who enters an emergency room in New York?

Pursuant to Federal law, if someone goes to an emergency room and requests treatment of a medical condition, the hospital must first determine an emergency medical condition exists. 42 U.S.C.S. § 1395dd(a). If an emergency medical condition exists, the hospital must either treat the medical condition to stabilize the emergency or transfer the patient to another medical facility. 42 U.S.C.S. § 1395dd(b)(1)(A) and (B).

Dr. Strange did not enter Metro-General Hospital through mortal means such as an ambulance, but a sling ring. Supernatural portals to an emergency room are irrelevant to the fact Strange entered the emergency room with a medical condition. There was no question a medical condition existed, because Dr. Strange had been stabbed with a mystical weapon. While there is an argument that a magical injury would be beyond the facilities at Metro-General, treating a stab wound should be standard for any emergency room in the United States.

The next issue is whether Dr. Palmer had a physician-patient relationship with Stephen Strange. The test is whether a physician had rendered professional services that had been accepted by another for medical or surgical treatment. See, Hanrahan v. Good Samaritan Hosp. Med. Ctr., 2013 NY Slip Op 33418(U), ¶ 3 (Sup. Ct.). This is a factual issue for a jury. Quirk v. Zuckerman, 765 N.Y.S.2d 440, 442-43 (Sup. Ct. 2003) citing Wienk-Evans v North Shore Univ. Hosp. at Glen Cove, 702 N.Y.S.2d 917 [2000].

The facts favor a finding that there was a physician-patient relationship. First, Dr. Strange entered the hospital via his sling ring. Second, Dr. Strange called for Dr. Palmer. Third, Dr. Palmer found Dr. Strange injured and choose to render medical treatment to Dr. Strange. As such, a jury could find Dr. Palmer had a physician-patient relationship with Strange.

Dr. Palmer owed Dr. Strange a duty to act as a “reasonably prudent doctor.” See, Masik v. Lutheran Med. Ctr., 2011 NY Slip Op 34163(U), ¶¶ 5-6 (Sup. Ct.), citing Nestorowich v Ricotta, 97 NY2d 393, 398. Conducting medical procedures on a patient with a mystical stab wound, who is also providing medical advice while battling his attacker on the astral plane, would definitely not be in the Physician’s Desk Reference. While turning up a defibrillator would not be something a “reasonably prudent doctor” would do, there is no expert testimony for doctors having a patient fight an astral attacker during treatment.

Wonder Woman Podcast

0

Jessica and I loved Wonder Woman. We sat down to discuss the new film, memories of the 1970s TV series, and the legal issues with compelling someone to incriminate themselves. We touch on the causes of World War I, war crimes, and a host of other topics in our review of Wonder Woman.

Celebrating the 10th Anniversary of Illusive Comics

0

Jack Yang and I both shop at Illusive Comics. We joined the owner Anna, and her great team, in celebrating their 10th Anniversary. We recorded a special podcast where we discussed how Illusive is a community for geeks, thoughts on recent comics, and the privacy issues with Mantis disclosing Star-Lord’s feelings for Gamora in Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol 2. And yes, we had cake.