I attended an AAAL appellate conference last week in San Diego, the focus of which was understanding how a judge thinks and is persuaded (so rhetoric rules like ethos, pathos, Artemis – wait, no, that last one is a Musketeer), all viewed from a social psyschology perspective – looking at what's happening in their brains. It was great, and I will blog on it anon.
But first, upcoming Maine appellate news ….
I hope that everyone is attending the Campaign for Justice Celebration this Friday at 3:30 pm. Yours Truly will be participating in the Legal Trivia Challenge, with CJ Saufley doing her best Alex Trebek (or if you are of a certain age, Art Fleming) impression as moderator. (Go team LaFond.) This gives you an unparalleled opportunity to see my public humiliation, as the Chief asks questions that I undoubtedly should know, but don't.
Also, the Maine SJC is continuing its excellent (fairly) new practice of asking for amici briefs on pending cases, and the ones it's asked for this time are on some interesting issues. The first addresses whether a prosecutor can comment on a refusal to consent to a warrantless search of someone to obtain a DNA sample (State v. Glover). The second appeal is from a District Court Protection from Abuse order, where the issue presented is whether "the defendant's acts in threatening to humiliate and embarass the plaintiff by posting online intimate photos of her that she had previously sent to him constitutes abuse under 19-A M.R.S A. s. 4002(1) 2012." (Clark v. McLane). Glover, Clark
Anyone – individuals, group, or whatever, can file a brief, due Nov. 11, 2013 in both appeals. So if you have something useful to say to the court and are concerned about these issues, step up!
Next time, the Judicial Brain and how to persuade it.
