We Americans love lots of things. We love to fall in love, we love to get married, we “love” to get divorced, and we love to move. Almost all of us fall in love (at the very least with our pets), almost all of us get married, almost half of us who get married get divorced, and almost half of us born in one state end up living in another. When our country was formed none of this was true. Marriage was near universal, divorce was unheard of, and most people stayed put.
State rights, one of our nation’s founding principles, made sense back then. It makes far less sense today. But your state of residence determines all kinds of things. These include the penalties for crimes you commit, how much you pay in taxes, how much you can collect in welfare, what you can leave your children when you die, where you can buy beer, whether you can smoke pot, whether you can readily get an abortion, and the list goes on.
One of the biggest issues some married couples face when they move across state lines is how they will fare if they get divorced. (And, again, almost half will untie the knot.) The answer may be far better or far worse depending on the state and even the county in which you reside. I say “may,” because if you reach an amicable settlement, that settlement may be legally approved no matter where you live. But if you have a contested divorce and end up leaving it up to a judge, she’ll likely apply state or county guidelines that can be very different depending on the state or country. Indeed, since only a few states and counties in the country have formal guidelines, the guidelines are mostly those set by the local judge. These judges are, of course, influenced primarily by what other judges in their locality and state are doing.
Why ‘brutal’ divorce laws must change in BreckenridgeWomen are quitting the practice of criminal law at a significantly higher rate than men, according to a new report by the Criminal Lawyers' Association (CLA). The report, entitled "The Retention of Women in the Private Practice of Criminal Law," was released this past weekend at a CLA conference in London, Ont. It found low pay, lack of financial support for maternity leave and being treated differently than male peers by judges and court staff as some of the reasons so many women are leaving private practice of criminal law. Gender inequality stands out in the workplace Ontario law society to drop parental leave program Minority lawyers face discrimination The report confirms what many had been reporting anecdotally for years, according to Breese Davies, vice-president of the CLA. "We all had impressions that women were leaving criminal practice at a higher rate than men," she said. "But we never had any numbers to determine whether or not our impressions were real." Breese Davies, a Toronto criminal lawyer and member of the Criminal Lawyers' Association, said the report found 'an enormous attrition rate' of female criminal lawyers over a span of 10 years. (Phil Brown) The study, authored by Natasha Madon, a postdoctoral research fellow from Griffith University in Brisbane, Australia and Anthony Doob, professor emeritus of criminology at the University of Toronto, examined statistics from Legal Aid Ontario and the Law Society of Upper Canada. They also set up five focus groups and surveyed 225 female criminal lawyers in Ontario. They found many women dropped criminal law after five years and very few were still practising in the area after 10 years. "Most shocking to me was, of the women who started doing criminal law in 1996, there were 47 of them. Eight years later, by 2004, only 13 of them were still doing a substantial amount of criminal law," Davies said. "That is an enormous attrition rate." Sixty-one per cent of those surveyed reported they considered leaving because of low pay, long hours and challenges dealing with the Legal Aid system, a key source of funds for those in criminal law. Many also pointed to the financial burden of maintaining a practice and running an office during maternity leaves. "It's amazing that, given all those challenges, we have any women in criminal law," said Indira Stewart, a Toronto defence lawyer who has been in practice for seven years. "It's such an uphill battle. It's such a tough field, even if you're not a woman." 'A systemic problem' Stewart, who has two young children, says many of the report's findings ring true for her. "The unpredictability of work hours, the logistical and financial challenges in taking a maternity leave and then having to completely rebuild your practice after returning. You really have to start from scratch after you've been gone," she said. "In my first maternity leave, I took less than four months, but even in that short time frame, clients' matters have to proceed, their cases move along and they form a relationship with a new lawyer." The Law Society of Upper Canada has a parental leave program, but it's very limited and requires applicants to pass a means test. 'It's a systemic problem that needs to be addressed.' - Breese Davies, vice-president, Criminal Lawyers' Association Many women also reported a lack of respect and being treated differently than male lawyers by court officers, police, crown attorneys and judges. One reported being called "little lady" repeatedly. Others said they were chastised for asking judges for time to pick up children from school whereas their male counterparts who made similar requests were not rebuked. The study also found senior male lawyers tended to see women as students or assistants rather than fully qualified professionals. Only 22 per cent of those surveyed said they felt men and women were treated equally in the system. "It's a systemic problem that needs to be addressed," Davies said. The study also found that many women gave up private defence practice to take government jobs or become Crown prosecutors, who have guaranteed regular hours, no overhead and benefits, including maternity leaves. Davies said it's important that the practice of criminal law reflect the community and legal profession. "Diversity matters," she said. "We need diverse perspectives to make sure the law develops in step with social values. You do not want a group of homogenous people designing and developing laws." The report makes several recommendations on how to resolve some of the issues women face: Create mentorship programs involving senior female lawyers; Develop education programs and sensitivity training for judges and other court staff; Establish fixed end times for courts and streamline court processes; Provide greater support for maternity leaves; Increase the number of female judges. "There's a lot to be done. These are pretty ambitious recommendations that touch a lot of areas of the criminal justice system," Davies said. She said she hopes to reassess the system in five years. "Certainly in five years, I would hope that we're not losing the number of women we're losing now," said Stewart.
Should I Refuse Field Sobriety Tests in Michigan?Operating while intoxicated is a common offense in Michigan, but many people do not know their rights during a traffic stop. As a result, they wind up facing charges that they may have avoided, or they give the prosecuting authority evidence to use against them. Common mistakes during a traffic stop include: Giving the officer permission to search the vehicle; Providing too much information; And consenting to field sobriety tests. Michigan is an implied consent state, which means that drivers automatically consent to a chemical sobriety test. As a result, you will face penalties for refusing a breathalyzer test: One year license suspension for the first offense Two year license suspension for the second offense Five year license suspension for the third offense However, you can refuse to take a field sobriety test without penalty. Although this may make the officer suspicious, it could reduce the amount of incriminating evidence the prosecuting authority has against you. Depending on the circumstances surrounding your arrest, the breathalyzer results may be inadmissible, but if you fail a standardized field sobriety test, the prosecuting authority can still use that against you. If you are facing OWI charges in Michigan A Grand Rapids criminal defense lawyer with a reputation for winning cases can structure your defense and explain the potential outcomes of your case. Read on to learn more about the three standardized field sobriety tests: Standardized Field Sobriety Tests As the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration explains, there are three standardized field sobriety tests: The Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus Test; The Walk and Turn Test; And the One Leg Stand Test. During the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus Test, the officer will see if the eye jerks at peripheral angles. Nystagmus is often exaggerated in people who are intoxicated. The officer who conducts the HGNT will look for three signs of impairment: Angle of jerking is not within 45 degrees; Suspect shows distinct jerking of the eyes; And the eye cannot follow a moving object. The One Leg Stand Test evaluates the suspect’s balance and coordination. You will stand on one leg with the opposite foot 6 inches above the ground. You will then have to count aloud until the officer asks you to lower the leg. The Walk and Turn Test also evaluates coordination. The suspect has to take nine steps heel-to-toe in a straight line, turn, and do the same in the opposite direction. According to the American Automobile Association, officers who conduct this test look for: Signs of imbalance; Ability to follow instructions; Ability to touch the heel to the toe; And the ability to walk in a straight line. If you are facing OWI charges in Michigan, there may be several defenses that apply to your case. For example, if the stop was unlawful, certain evidence – such as the breathalyzer results and the results of your field sobriety tests – may be inadmissible in court. A Grand Rapids criminal law attorney from Gordon & Hess, PLC can represent your interests.