tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7656840100957938850.post5313710419792800819..comments2023-11-22T02:22:42.456-08:00Comments on Independence of Representation in Court and Judicial Accountability in the United States: New York Court of Appeals has disgraced itself with the decision claiming that transcripts from electronic recordings of courts "not of record" do not constitute full court record for purposes of appealTatiana Neronihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02164591853661429324noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7656840100957938850.post-30247508872857637262016-08-29T06:16:19.396-07:002016-08-29T06:16:19.396-07:00It is a question not simply of law, but of constit...It is a question not simply of law, but of constitutional rights not to be convicted and sent to jail by a court which does not even take a reliable record of what it is doing, not to mention that judges of that court do not have to have legal education or any level of formal education at all, even Kindergarten. Apparently, according to the NYS Court of Appeals decision, audio record required by the NYS Office of Court Administration's own rules is not reliable and instead an affidavit based on memory. Now, whose memory that is? Defendant's if appellate counsel is not the same as trial counsel, Or, if it appellate counsel is the same as trial counsel, the trial counsel must now memorize the record better than the audiotape? The decision is a caveman/woman's decision putting affidavits from memory over the reliability of the court's own audiorecording. Courts not of record, after this decision, are confirmed by the highest state court as simply unconstitutional, not that New York courts care about such trifles.<br /> <br />Btw, guidelines articulated in a concurrence never limit anything, a concurrence does not have precedential value unless the majority if judges of the court concur on that particular issue. Moreover, courts repeatedly feel free to ignore even precedential majority opinions when it suited their pre-judged plan - deny a motion or an appeal in a certain case (criminal, family court, defense of foreclosure, civil rights).Tatiana Neronihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02164591853661429324noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7656840100957938850.post-59545129207222116142016-08-29T00:07:11.255-07:002016-08-29T00:07:11.255-07:00It’s a question of law, but not one of statutory c...It’s a question of law, but not one of statutory construction. I had hoped that the guidelines articulated in Justice Kagan’s concurrence in Heien would limit the damage done by the majority opinion, but it looks like those go out the window where the mistake of law doesn’t involve the interpretation of text.<br /><br />I wonder if these mistakes of law <a href="http://www.omofomalaw.com/" rel="nofollow">will</a> turn out to be “exceedingly rare”.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17865684489448065819noreply@blogger.com