Legal


Interception of Communications Act

PART I Preliminary 1. This Act may be cited as the Interception of Communications Act. 2.─(1) In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires, “attorney-at-law” has the meaning given to it under section 2 of the Legal Profession Act, Cap. 320; “authorised officer” means the Commissioner of Police; or (a) a person for the time being lawfully exercising the functions of the Commissioner of Police; (b) an officer authorised in writing to act on behalf of the Commissioner of Police; or (c) the Chief Executive Officer in the Ministry responsible for the Belize Police Department; (d) any person employed by […]


United States vs Hertular

UNITED STATES v. HERTULAR UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Robert HERTULAR, Defendant-Appellant. 07-1453-cr. Docket No. Argued: June 19, 2008. — April 06, 2009 Before: STRAUB, RAGGI, Circuit Judges, and SESSIONS, District Judge. 1 Anirudh Bansal, Assistant United States Attorney (Jesse M. Furman, Katherine Polk Failla, Assistant United States Attorneys, of counsel), for Michael J. Garcia, United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, New York, New York, for Appellee.Avrom Robin (Ira D. London, of counsel), Law Office of Ira D. London, New York, New York, for Defendant-Appellant. In a pro se submission, Hertular raises myriad other challenges. Through […]