Court Digest

Alaska
Man convicted of murder in the 1978 death of a teenage girl
ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) — An Oregon man has been convicted of murder in the 1978 death of a teenage girl in Alaska, in a case investigators made using genetic genealogy decades later.

Donald McQuade, 67, was convicted this week in state court in Anchorage of murder in the death of Shelley Connolly, 16, whose body was found near a highway pullout between Anchorage and Girdwood, Alaska Public Media reported. Sentencing is set for April 26.

Years after Connolly’s death, Alaska State Troopers developed a DNA profile from swabs collected from her body but failed to get a match. In 2019, they turned to genetic genealogy testing, which involves comparing a DNA profile to known profiles in genealogical databases to find people who share the same genetic information.

McQuade was living in Alaska when Connolly died, and investigators later were able to get a DNA sample from him that they said matched DNA found on her body.

McQuade was arrested in 2019 but his trial, like others at the time, was delayed because of the onset of the coronavirus pandemic.

The prosecutor during the trial emphasized the evidence from Connolly’s body. But McQuade’s attorney, Kyle Barber, told jurors the DNA evidence was the only evidence the state had against McQuade. He said investigators also found DNA evidence possibly linked to two other people.

Maryland
Prison contraband scheme ends with 15 guilty pleas
BALTIMORE (AP) — Fifteen people have pleaded guilty for their roles in a prison contraband scheme in Maryland that included the use of drones to smuggle drugs, cellphones and other items into a state prison, the state’s attorney general announced.

The guilty pleas came seven months after Attorney General Anthony Brown first announced that a correctional officer and civilians had been indicted on charges that they assisted inmates in illegal activity at the Roxbury Correctional Institution in Hagerstown, Maryland.

“Safety is as important in our correctional institutions as it is to the public in our neighborhoods and communities,” Brown said in a news release this week. “This meticulous investigation and subsequent convictions send a clear message that we will not tolerate crime or corruption within our correctional facilities that disrupts the goals of rehabilitation.”

An investigation began in April 2022, after authorities recovered drugs and other contraband that had been smuggled into the prison after an inmate returned to the facility from a hospital visit.

The AG’s investigative team “uncovered a complex web of conspiracies operating to smuggle drugs and other contraband into RCI by way of an employee, drones, and outside civilians who were recruited over social media,” according to the news release.

Last month, Brown announced additional charges against one of the RCI inmates, Jose Miguel Tapia. Tapia created a fake court commitment document and impersonated a representative from a state’s attorney’s office in an attempt to secure his unlawful early release from prison, the attorney general said.

The forged document, imprinted with the seal of the clerk of the circuit court, purported to award Tapia 449 days of credit for time served against his sentence in an effort to get him an early release, Brown said.

From his prison cell, Tapia electronically faxed the fake order to the clerk of the Circuit Court for Baltimore City and, assuming the identity of a representative from the state’s attorney’s office, called the clerk’s office to request that it be processed, according to the news release.

The clerk’s office recognized that the commitment was forged, the attorney general’s office said. Tapia was sentenced to 14 additional years.

Oregon
Appeals court finds rules for state’s climate program invalid
PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — A state appeals court in Oregon decided late Wednesday that the rules for a program designed to limit and drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel companies are invalid. The program, started in 2022, is one of the strongest climate programs in the nation.

State environmental officials said the court’s decision hinges on an administrative error and doesn’t touch on whether the state Department of Environmental Quality has the authority to implement the program. The Climate Protection Program targets a 90% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from transportation fuels and natural gas by 2050.

Wednesday’s decision by the Oregon Court of Appeals comes in a case brought by fossil fuel companies that alleged the state Environmental Quality Commission erred in its rulemaking for the program. The commission acts as the Department of Environmental Quality’s policy and rulemaking board.

The court in its decision said it concluded the rules for the program were invalid.

The department said the decision was limited to an administrative error and not effective immediately, Oregon Public Broadcasting reported.

“The court did not make a decision about whether the Environmental Quality Commission has authority to adopt the Climate Protection Program,” Lauren Wirtis, a department spokesperson, said in a statement.

The department is confident it has the authority to adopt and enforce the program and is evaluating next steps with the state Department of Justice, Wirtis said.

NW Natural, one of the litigants, said it was pleased with the court’s decision and that it is committed to moving toward a low-carbon energy future.

A group of environmental, climate and social justice groups agreed with the state position that the decision focused on a procedural technicality and did not undermine the Department of Environmental Quality’s authority to set greenhouse gas emissions limits on the oil and gas industry.


Vermont
Man sentenced in wife’s slaying with meat cleaver
BURLINGTON, Vt. (AP) — A Vermont man with a history of mental health issues who was convicted of killing his wife with a meat cleaver and injuring his mother-in-law will serve at least 27 years in prison.

“It was an accident,” Aita Gurung said during his two-day sentencing hearing, which concluded Wednesday. “My mind was not working.”

A jury convicted Gurung last year of killing his wife, Yogeswari Khadka, 32, in Burlington, and attempted second-degree murder in the attack on his mother-in-law, hours after he had sought mental health treatment at a local hospital.

The attacks happened in 2017 and he was charged. But the charges were dropped in 2019 by the county prosecutor, who said evidence showed Gurung was legally insane at the time. Then-Attorney General T.J.
Donovan refiled the charges months later after Republican Gov. Phil Scott asked him to review the case. Donovan said he wanted to restore public trust and that the issue of insanity should be decided by a jury.

Gurung’s mother-in-law, Tulasa Rimal, testified via video during the hearing. “No matter what, he should get the harshest punishment,” Rimal, speaking Nepali, said through a translator.

Judge John Pacht said, “We have rage and serious mental health issues going on,” adding, “We know that they can be compatible and we know that they are both present in this case.”

Pacht also pointed out Gurung’s history of domestic violence.

“We are grateful that Tulasa and members of her family were able to share with the court the impact that these tragic acts of domestic violence had and continue to have on their lives,” Attorney General Charity Clark said in a statement Wednesday.

Gurung’s attorney, Sandra Lee, said her client “appreciates the court considering his mental health issues and recognizes the horrific nature of his offenses and he accepts the judge’s sentence.”

Gurung’s total sentence was 35 years to life, with part of the time suspended. He would be eligible for release on probation once he serves his term.


California
Federal judge blocks law that would have banned carrying firearms in most public places
LOS ANGELES (AP) — A federal judge on Wednesday blocked a California law that would have banned carrying firearms in most public places, ruling that it violates the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and deprives people of their ability to defend themselves and their loved ones.

The law signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in September was set to take effect Jan. 1. It would have prohibited people from carrying concealed guns in 26 places including public parks and playgrounds, churches, banks and zoos. The ban would apply whether the person has a permit to carry a concealed weapon or not. One exception would be for privately owned businesses that put up signs saying people are allowed to bring guns on their premises.

U.S. District Judge Cormac Carney granted a preliminary injunction blocking the law, which he wrote was “sweeping, repugnant to the Second Amendment, and openly defiant of the Supreme Court.”

The court case against the law will proceed while the law is blocked. The judge wrote that gun rights groups are likely to succeed in proving it unconstitutional, meaning it would be permanently overturned.

The decision is a victory for the California Rifle and Pistol Association, which sued to block the law. The measure overhauled the state’s rules for concealed carry permits in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen, which set several states scrambling to react with their own laws. That decision said the constitutionality of gun laws must be assessed by whether they are “consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.”

“California progressive politicians refuse to accept the Supreme Court’s mandate from the Bruen case and are trying every creative ploy they can imagine to get around it,” the California association’s president, Chuck Michel, said in a statement. “The Court saw through the State’s gambit.”

Michel said under the law, gun permit holders “wouldn’t be able to drive across town without passing through a prohibited area and breaking the law.” He said the judge’s decision makes Californians safer because criminals are deterred when law-abiding citizens can defend themselves.

State Attorney General Rob Bonta said his office will appeal the decision, which he said if allowed to stand “would endanger communities by allowing guns in places where families and children gather.”

Newsom said he will keep pushing for stricter gun measures.

“Defying common sense, this ruling outrageously calls California’s data-backed gun safety efforts ‘repugnant.’ What is repugnant is this ruling, which greenlights the proliferation of guns in our hospitals, libraries, and children’s playgrounds — spaces, which should be safe for all,” the governor said in a statement Wednesday evening.

Newsom has positioned himself as a national leader on gun control while he is being increasingly eyed as a potential presidential candidate. He has called for and signed a variety of bills, including measures targeting untraceable “ghost guns,” the marketing of firearms to children and allowing people to bring lawsuits over gun violence. That legislation was patterned on a Texas anti-abortion law.

Carney is a former Orange County Superior Court judge who was appointed to the federal bench by President George W. Bush in 2003.