Recommended: Non-related cases legal guidance
On September 8, 2015, at approximately 12:52 PM I, Deputy Ragsdale, was contacted by Captain Tucker to call Michael Holcombe in reference to a theft. I then contacted Michael Holcombe on Wood County cell two. He told me that his daughter was renting a house at 116 Oak Street, Yantis, Texas from Margi Halfcox, suspect. Michael Holcombe told me that he let his daughter borrow his riding lawn mower. He then advised me that his daughter was moving out of that residence.
MILLERSBURG — A Wooster man on Wednesday was given a chance to avoid prison when he was sentenced to complete a treatment program for admittedly being in possession of methamphetamine. Shaun Hall, 38, 540 High St., previously pleaded guilty in Holmes County Common Pleas Court to aggravated possession of meth. In exchange for his guilty plea, a related charge of aggravated trafficking in meth was dismissed. Hall had faced up to a year in prison for the charge, and Judge Robert Rinfret imposed a term of 11 months, but immediately suspended the period of incarceration in favor of five years of community control, which includes the condition he complete a treatment program at the Stark Regional Community Corrections Center.
On 7-22-2016, I, Richard Reyes was dispatched to a call for criminal trespassing at 12625 Wetmore Rd, San Antonio, TX. at approximately 0800 hours. I arrived on site at 0818 hours, where there were 2 men arguing inside of the class room. I was accompanied by back-up officer Alysha Rosario, we separated the two men from each other and asked the suspect Johnny McGregor to step outside, and the Officer Rosario spoke with him and gathered his story. I stayed inside of the classroom and spoke with the victim Jose Robledo about the incident, where Jose explained to me that his step-brother Johnny has been using the car and has not been adding gas to it.
On the above date and time I was conducting an area check of the the Ridge Road Center plaza. While behind the plaza, I observed a white, 4 door Mercury occupied by three white males. The vehicle was located in the back of the plaza next to a closed store. As I passed the vehicle all four males continued to stare at me. Concerned that the driver, or passengers may have a medical emergency, or a disabled vehicle, I proceeded to pull behind the vehicle without my lights or sirens activated to inquire.
S/S Folwaczny contacted Non- Emergency 911 concerning two black sedans parked on the premises in front of OPS 1 at 12490 Sunrise Valley Drive. S/S Folwaczny spoke to Dispatch Operator Dang concerning the vehicles, After running the VIN number, D/O Dang was able to confirm that the vehicles were not stolen and that any further action pertaining to the vehicles would have to take place Sprint Security.
On 09/06/16 I contacted Robert Beck Jr., with Apple Tree Service, at 3603 Roderweis Road in reference to a criminal mischief call. Mr. Beck said sometime over the nighttime hours someone damaged two of Apple Tree Services trucks that were parked in the parking area of the above address. Mr. Beck said one truck had a hasp cut off of a cargo box and another truck a door bent, from being pried open, on a cargo box. Mr. Beck said there did not appear to be any missing items from either truck. Mr. Beck could not provide any suspect information and estimated the damage to the two vehicles at $200 per vehicle.
You Will Be The Judge Facts: The case involves a 12 year old child named Griffin Grimbly who told the teacher that he was beaten with a clothesline by his father Mr.Gimli. In court, the Mr.Gimli argued that he was devoted to Christian and was following the Biblical injunction on child rearing, “Spare the rod and spoil the child”, as well as arguing that s 43 of the criminal code gives parents the right to use “reasonable force” in disciplining their children. Issue: Is Mr. Grimbly is guilty of or not guilty of assault ? Held: Mr.Grimbly is guilty of assault.
On the date of 03/08/2017 at about () hours I was dispatched to the address of 300 N 6th St (the Greybull Motel) in Greybull to a reported domestic violance situation. I was informed by dispatch that the reporting party was in the office of the motel at this time. Upon my arriavl at the above location I spoke with the reporting party, Donald MOFETT() who informed me that his girlfriend had struck him multiple times in the face, neck and shoulder. I observed that MOFETT 'S left eye apeared to be swollen, I also observed marks on the left side of his face, and on his right sholder. When I asked MOFETT what had happened prior to the incident he stated that himself and his girlfriend Montica ROMERO() had gotten a motel room to have some time away from her family that they are staying with, and that both parties had consumed alcohol.
Be on the lookout for Michael Hastings and Nathan Jones they are the suspects in the stolen money from Hucks this morning. They were driving a 2012 Chevrolet Malibu Missouri License number MM1P5D. The vehicle has front end damage to the driver’s side headlight area. The vehicle belongs to Felicia Skaggs who is Michael Hastings’ girlfriend and I have been informed he lives with her at 123 Fashionable Circle on East Outer Road. As of the time of this email the vehicle was not at the residence and it did not appear as if anyone was
MILLERSBURG — Despite a plea for leniency expressed by the victim, a Sugarcreek man was unable to overcome a long history of criminal convictions and a bond violation when a Holmes County judge on Wednesday sentenced him to prison for making unwanted phone calls and threats to several members of a family over a period of months. David Lamar Schrock, 43, of 2578 State Route 39, previously pleaded guilty in Holmes County Common Pleas Court to two counts of telephone harassment and one count of menacing by stalking. In exchange for his guilty plea, the state agreed to dismiss two additional counts of telephone harassment and three counts of menacing by stalking. The charges are made more serious because Schrock was convicted, in January 2016,
Step 1: Establish the facts and determine the issues Phoebe, my client, contracts with Fertility Specialists to donate her eggs. Although she does not get paid for the eggs because they are considered donation, she does receive a donor fee totaling $12,000. This fee covers the painful egg stimulation and extraction procedures. When donating eggs the procedure involves a lot of time, effort, inconvenience, pain and suffering. Her contract explicitly states, “The payments are for her pain and suffering and not for the sale of her eggs.”
The ruling made by Chief Justice John Marshall in the1803 court case Marbury v. Madison was consider significance because it established the power of the judicial branch with the principle that the Supreme Court may declare an act of Congress void if it is considered inconsistent with the United States Constitution. This means that the court has the power to decide which laws are considered constitutional in what is referred to as judicial review. Judicial review in the courts, states that the judicial branch can review laws created by the legislative branch and establish if they are constitutional or not. The separation of power provided a type of check and balance to insure that no one branch in the government hold all the power and that
munity; if she could be a witch, then anyone could. Magistrates even questioned Sarah Good's 4-year-old daughter, Dorothy, and her timid answers were construed as a confession. The questioning got more serious in April when Deputy Governor Thomas Danforth and his assistants attended the hearings. Dozens of people from Salem and other Massachusetts villages were brought in for questioning.
Looking at the totality of the circumstance, which is the test used when the court focuses on all of the circumstances surrounding a situation rather than any one factor, I do believe that the evidence obtained during the traffic stop and arrest in question would remain valid. I believe because the arresting officer acted on good faith and did not violate subject ’s Fourth Amendment right. The officer performed, what he or she probably believed to be a routine traffic stop at the time, then discovered that the subject had an arrest warrant.
Plaintiff once again argues that it was the prevailing party and that an award of attorney fees and expenses to defendants should, therefore, be denied. Plaintiff acknowledges that it bases its argument on the same authorities used to support its Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s Memorandum of Costs. Because the authorities and argument on this point are set forth in Defendants’ Reply to Plaintiff’s Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s Memorandum of Costs, the argument will not be repeated here. Defendants simply add the observation that in the context of Plaintiff’s opposition to an award of attorney fees and costs, Plaintiff uses a verbal sleight-of-hand to further muddy the record. Plaintiff incorrectly
