By Lee Davis
A recently passed bill which will became law on July 1st will permit some criminals to expunge select felonies and misdemeanors from their records after paying a fee and meeting other court requirements. The law will only apply to those with a single conviction, not repeat offenders.
Before passage of the bill, legislators discussed how the current economic decline has led to a surge in the number of people seeking to expunge their records of criminal convictions. As jobs have become scarcer people found that even old infractions could be used as justification to avoid hiring them. There’s been a surge in the number of requests for expungements over the last few years, from 23,000 in 2007 to some 39,000 across the state in 2011. Legislators say that this recent loosening of restrictions contained in the recent bill will lead to huge additional increases, adding a shocking 60,000 requests each year.
Before the recent passage, a conviction was permanent unless there was an executive exoneration from the governor. Expungement was only allowed for those not guilty or whose charges were dropped or those sentenced to judicial diversion.
The recent passage means that Tennessee will join at least 17 other states that permit first-time offenders to expunge a criminal charge under certain conditions. Under the current law, offenders can only have a single criminal conviction, must be willing to wait for five years after all court requirements have been fulfilled and then must pay $350 to apply to have their one charge expunged. Those seeking expungement must apply in the county where they are convicted and a hearing must be held allowing prosecutors the opportunity to object.
Most of the felonies that are eligible for expungment are property crimes like theft and vandalism where the value of the stolen goods is less than $1,000. Very minor drug charges like simple possession can also be expunged. The majority of misdemeanors are eligible, with the exception of convictions for violent crimes like assault and domestic assault, a few kinds of weapons charges, child neglect, molestation and DUI convictions.
Read: “TN law allows some felons a second chance,” by Brian Haas, published at WBIR.com.
Earlier: "Expungement law goes into effect." by Stevie Phillips
Showing posts with label Legislation-TN. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Legislation-TN. Show all posts
Friday, July 6, 2012
Tuesday, July 3, 2012
New Laws Broaden Scope of Sex Offender Registry
The Tennessee
General Assembly passed four new laws that broaden the scope of the sex
offender registry. A brief
explanation of each new law follows:
House Bill 2853
The main
difference between registering as a standard sex offender and registering as a
violent sex offender is that a standard sex offender may petition to be removed
from the registry ten (10) years after completion of probation, parole, or
incarceration. The violent sex offender
registry, on the other hand, is for life.
After passage of House Bill 2853, a person convicted of first-offense promotion of prostitution
must register as a standard sex offender.
It’s only upon conviction of a subsequent offense that he or she must
register as a violent sex offender.
House Bill 2939
After the
passage of House Bill 2939, a person convicted of trafficking a person for a
commercial sex act must register as a sex offender.
This requirement
is only a small part of this new law, however.
The main purpose of House Bill 2939 is to revise the definition of
“trafficking a person for a commercial sex act.” Specifically, a sex act can now be commercial
if secured by causing or threatening physical harm, restraint, abuse of law or
legal process, destruction of a passport or immigration/government document,
blackmail, or facilitating access to a controlled substance.
House Bill
3283
Previously, a
judge could only require a person convicted of statutory rape to register as a
sex offender if that person had a prior conviction for mitigated statutory
rape, statutory rape, or aggravated statutory rape.
After the
passage of House Bill 3283, a judge may require a person convicted of
statutory rape for the first time to register as a sex offender. In determining whether to impose this
requirement, the trial court must consider the totality of the facts and
circumstances surrounding the offense, including the offense for which the
person was actually charged and whether the conviction is the result of a plea agreement.
House Bill 3398
House Bill 3398
applies to registered sex offenders whose victims were minors and who are later
convicted of violating the residential and work restrictions in the TN Sexual
Offender and Violent Sexual Offender Registration, Verification and Tracking
Act of 2004.
Under this new
law, which amends section 39-13-530(a), any conveyance or personal property
(not real property) is subject to judicial forfeiture if used during the
commission of such a violation. The
proceeds of the judicial forfeiture will be allotted to the child abuse
fund. Under current law, 50% of that
money funds child advocacy centers, 25% funds court appointed special advocates,
and 25% funds child abuse prevention.
Saturday, June 30, 2012
Tennessee legislators celebrate Independence Day with 151 new laws set to take effect on July 1st
By Lee Davis
Tennessee legislators have been busy these last few months compiling a seemingly never-ending stack of bills for Governor Bill Haslam's signature. This legislation will become law on July 1st. What are they? Well they cover a wide variety of concerns and some will affect criminal law, creating new crimes and escalating criminal penalties.
For example, one of the laws slated to go into affect on the 1st of July includes a provision that permits more people to request expungement of criminal convictions for mostly old and minor offenses--this legislation is remarkable in that it is well thought out and resolved a difficult problem. In the information age, how can someone clean up a minor problem from their past? Up to now you couldn't. Now a few select felonies and a wide array of misdemeanous will be permitted to be expunged from the records of first-time offenders.
Another law creates a fine for those that are found to have encouraged, advocated, urged or condoned students to engage in “gateway sexual activity.” Whatever that is. Educators found teaching a non abstinence-based sexual education curriculum can be punished with up to $500 in fines. In a school somewhere in Tennessee next year a parent is going to insist to a principal that a teacher should be reported for encouraging gateway sexual activity and fined. It is hard to imagine how the courts are supposed to figure out what the legislature intended with this sloppy piece of legislation--gateway sexual activity?
Here’s a run down of some of the important and bizarre additions to Tennessee criminal law:
SB3558 - This requires schools to include in their discipline codes a prohibition on students wearing any clothing on school grounds that exposes underwear or body parts in an indecent manner.
SB0074 – This bill makes it a Class C misdemeanor offense for any person to operate a motorcycle on municipal, county or state roads who is carrying a passenger whose feet are not on footpegs. The amendment specifies that the prohibition will not apply to persons riding in a motorcycle sidecar.
HB2466 – This bill is known as the “Ricky Otts Act” and requires an officer to arrest drivers involved in accidents resulting in serious bodily injury or death when such drivers lack a valid driver license and evidence of financial responsibility. The bill specifically prohibits the issuance of a citation in lieu of arrest in such circumstances.
HB2853 – This bill deals with sexual offenders and adds the offense of promoting prostitution to the list of sexual offenses requiring registration under the state sex offender registry. Similarly, HB3283 authorizes judges, after consideration of facts and circumstances surrounding the case, to require a person convicted of statutory rape for the first time to register as a sexual offender on the sexual offender and violent sexual offender registry.
HB2566 – This was passed in response to the outrage surrounding now disgraced judge Richard Baumgartner and says that elected and appointed public officials ineligible for diversion for criminal offenses committed in their official capacity or that involve the duties of their offices.
HB2749 – This DUI bill authorizes a judge to order the use of an ignition interlock device for any person granted a restricted driver license and the device must remain in the vehicle during the entire period of time the driver has a restricted license.
SB2349 – “Kimberlee’s Law,” says that people convicted of aggravated rape must serve 100% of their sentence.
SB2759 – Creates a new level of criminal offense, a Class E felony of aggravated cruelty to livestock, which will exist when someone has intentionally engaged in specified conduct in a depraved and sadistic manner that results in serious bodily injury or death to the animal and is done without lawful or legitimate purpose.
Finally, and oddly, there’s HB2768, which makes it a Class A misdemeanor criminal offense for any person to knowingly dig, harvest, collect or remove wild ginseng from any land that such person does not own on any date not within the wild ginseng harvest season.
Tennessee legislators have been busy these last few months compiling a seemingly never-ending stack of bills for Governor Bill Haslam's signature. This legislation will become law on July 1st. What are they? Well they cover a wide variety of concerns and some will affect criminal law, creating new crimes and escalating criminal penalties.
For example, one of the laws slated to go into affect on the 1st of July includes a provision that permits more people to request expungement of criminal convictions for mostly old and minor offenses--this legislation is remarkable in that it is well thought out and resolved a difficult problem. In the information age, how can someone clean up a minor problem from their past? Up to now you couldn't. Now a few select felonies and a wide array of misdemeanous will be permitted to be expunged from the records of first-time offenders.
Another law creates a fine for those that are found to have encouraged, advocated, urged or condoned students to engage in “gateway sexual activity.” Whatever that is. Educators found teaching a non abstinence-based sexual education curriculum can be punished with up to $500 in fines. In a school somewhere in Tennessee next year a parent is going to insist to a principal that a teacher should be reported for encouraging gateway sexual activity and fined. It is hard to imagine how the courts are supposed to figure out what the legislature intended with this sloppy piece of legislation--gateway sexual activity?
Here’s a run down of some of the important and bizarre additions to Tennessee criminal law:
SB3558 - This requires schools to include in their discipline codes a prohibition on students wearing any clothing on school grounds that exposes underwear or body parts in an indecent manner.
SB0074 – This bill makes it a Class C misdemeanor offense for any person to operate a motorcycle on municipal, county or state roads who is carrying a passenger whose feet are not on footpegs. The amendment specifies that the prohibition will not apply to persons riding in a motorcycle sidecar.
HB2466 – This bill is known as the “Ricky Otts Act” and requires an officer to arrest drivers involved in accidents resulting in serious bodily injury or death when such drivers lack a valid driver license and evidence of financial responsibility. The bill specifically prohibits the issuance of a citation in lieu of arrest in such circumstances.
HB2853 – This bill deals with sexual offenders and adds the offense of promoting prostitution to the list of sexual offenses requiring registration under the state sex offender registry. Similarly, HB3283 authorizes judges, after consideration of facts and circumstances surrounding the case, to require a person convicted of statutory rape for the first time to register as a sexual offender on the sexual offender and violent sexual offender registry.
HB2566 – This was passed in response to the outrage surrounding now disgraced judge Richard Baumgartner and says that elected and appointed public officials ineligible for diversion for criminal offenses committed in their official capacity or that involve the duties of their offices.
HB2749 – This DUI bill authorizes a judge to order the use of an ignition interlock device for any person granted a restricted driver license and the device must remain in the vehicle during the entire period of time the driver has a restricted license.
SB2349 – “Kimberlee’s Law,” says that people convicted of aggravated rape must serve 100% of their sentence.
SB2759 – Creates a new level of criminal offense, a Class E felony of aggravated cruelty to livestock, which will exist when someone has intentionally engaged in specified conduct in a depraved and sadistic manner that results in serious bodily injury or death to the animal and is done without lawful or legitimate purpose.
Finally, and oddly, there’s HB2768, which makes it a Class A misdemeanor criminal offense for any person to knowingly dig, harvest, collect or remove wild ginseng from any land that such person does not own on any date not within the wild ginseng harvest season.
Sunday, June 10, 2012
The Baumgartner Debacle Continues
 |
| former judge Ricard Baumgartner photo knoxnews.com |
The state Attorney General’s Office earlier appealed Blackwood’s first retrial order, and on May 24 the Supreme Court issued an opinion saying that former judge Baumgartner’s misconduct off the bench was not reason enough to justify new trials. The high court said that the defense would have to show that actual error or bias had occurred. The justices further questioned Judge Blackwood’s ruling that Baumgartner’s inability to serve as the 13th juror was justification for new trials. The Court did leave open the possibility that if witness credibility were essential, Baumgartner’s behavior could be used as support.
Blackwood took the opportunity to revisit his ruling and quickly decided he had been right the first time. The Supreme Court never overruled him and did not bar him from again granting new trials. The justices simply asked that he review his initial order using their opinion as a guide.
Blackwood did base his second retrial order on language contained the Supreme Court’s opinion, specifically mentioning the importance of witness credibility to the ultimate outcome of the trials. Blackwood said because witness credibility was such an “overriding and important issue" at trial he did not feel he was able to step into the role of the 13th juror left open thanks to Baumgartner’s resignation.
The order came just a few days after Knox County District Attorney General Randy Nichols filed a motion asking that Blackwood recuse himself from the case. Prosecutors argued that Blackwood was biased against them, having planned to grant new trials before allowing the state to make its case. It is hard to understand their position, given that they are arguably the only ones who could have had knowledge or power to do anything about Baumgartner's misbehavior.
Current law in the state is vague about what is to happen when a motion to recuse is before a judge. The current Rule 10 of the state’s Code of Judicial Conduct states only that:
“A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to instances where: (a) the judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party or a party’s lawyer, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding; [or] (b) the judge served as a lawyer in the matter in controversy, or a lawyer with whom the judge previously practiced law served during such association as a lawyer concerning the matter, or the judge has been a material witness concerning it.”
The Supreme Court recently adopted a new Rule 10 that is set to go into effect on July 1 of this year. The new rule would prevent a judge whose recusal is being sought from issuing any orders or rules until the motion to recuse has been dealt with. The new rule also gives the petitioning party a right to automatic emergency appeal should the judge deny the motion. Because the rule is not yet in effect Blackwood is permitted to issue his second order despite the current motion for him to recuse himself.
Read: “Blackwood reasserts order: New trials in Christian-Newsom killings,” by Jamie Satterfield, published at KnoxNews.com.
Earlier:
Friday, May 25, 2012
Tennessee’s New Expungement Statute Goes into Effect July 1
By Stevie Phillips
Currently, under Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-32-101, a person can petition the court for expungement of public records involving a criminal offense, but the record will be expunged only if the charge was dismissed, no true bill was returned by the grand jury, or the person was arrested and released without being charged. Pursuant to an amendment to this statute that will go into effect on July 1, a person may petition the court for expungement of an actual conviction.
The
person seeking the expungement must meet certain requirements, and not all
offenses are eligible. A person may not
seek expungement if she has been convicted of any other offense at any time. In addition, at least five years must have
elapsed since the person seeking expungement fulfilled the requirements of her
sentence. Finally, the conviction is not
eligible for expungement if the sentence imposed was a term of more than three
years imprisonment.
The amendment sets out separate but similar standards for convictions based on offenses committed before and after November 1, 1989. For post-1989 offenses, there is a list of eligible Class E felonies, including but not limited to theft; fraudulent use of a credit or debit card; worthless checks; car burglary; vandalism; and some drug offenses.
Misdemeanors are also eligible for expungement subject to a long
list of exceptions. Offenses related to
domestic violence are, notably, not eligible, including domestic assault,
violation of a protective order, and possession of a firearm while a protective
order is in effect. Also excluded are a
variety of offenses that involve minor victims, including child abuse, neglect,
or endangerment. Finally, a conviction
for (DUI) driving under the influence of an intoxicant is also not eligible for
expungement.
Generally, convictions committed before November 1, 1989, are eligible. Exceptions exist, however, for inerently dangerous offenses or those that require registration as a sex offender, involve intoxicants and a motor vehicle, involve the sale or distribution of some classes of drugs, or that result in serious bodily injury, harm to a minor, or damages in excess of $25,000.
The legislature
has directed the district attorneys general conference to create a simple form
that lay people can use to petition for expungement. A $350 filing fee is also required. If the petition is granted, the conviction is
deemed to have never occurred, and a copy of the expungement “shall be
sufficient proof that the person named in the order is no longer under any
disability, disqualification or other adverse consequence resulting from the
expunged conviction.” If the petition is
denied, the petitioner may file again after two years.
A summary of the bill can be found here.
Davis & Hoss attorneys practice criminal law in all courts of Tennessee.
A summary of the bill can be found here.
Davis & Hoss attorneys practice criminal law in all courts of Tennessee.
Thursday, May 3, 2012
RICO gang legislation passes Tennessee House
+dean.jpeg) |
| Rep. Vince Dean (East Ridge, TN) |
Some believe the recently passed gang legislation is a substantive bill and the bill’s sponsor, Representative Vince Dean (R-East Ridge), puts it this way: “It’s kind of like going from a screwdriver to an electric drill.”
Others question the wisdom of attacking street crime with a complicated statute that has had limited success in the federal criminal justice system. It is hard enough to get a violent gang related case to trial now, with jury trial dates routinely more than a year after the crime. Adding this legislation will slow the system down. RICO cases are labor intensive, expensive and require significantly more resources to investigate, prosecute and ultimately defend in court. That is the opinion of several veteran trial attorneys--including former prosecutors and defense attorneys.
Other critics of the legislation point out that there are already laws on the books for every violent crime that the new law purports to target. And lastly, the US Attorney's office has the resources, the experience and the joint cooperation of federal and local law enforcement to prosecute RICO cases with existing federal laws.
Some law enforcement officers believe that Tennessee’s version of the federal RICO (Racketeer-Influenced-Corrupt-Organizations) Act could make a dent in gang activity by defining the gangs themselves as criminal enterprises, and making membership a crime in itself.
Chattanooga law enforcement is divided according to a report in the Times-Free Press, Chattanooga Police Sgt. Todd Royval oversees the Crime Suppression Unit, which tracks gang activity. He said he’s not sure a state RICO statute is needed to address the gang problem in the city.
Federal RICO laws should be enough, he said. “A RICO case is a very labor intensive and expensive case to investigate, and we would have to involve other state and federal agencies for assistance,” Royval said. “It would be easier and more cost effective to use the current federal statute for RICO. A good RICO case would probably include defendants from outside of Hamilton County and possibly into other states, so I would be inclined to start a federal RICO case instead of a state RICO case.”
Chattanooga Police Capt. Edwin McPherson oversees the special investigations unit, which includes Royval’s group. He said the law is needed. “I think that it will work for us in certain situations for people deserving of a stiffer penalty for the crimes they are committing,” he said. “I really think that it is something we can use as leverage on gang bangers who want to go out here and commit crimes as a group or organization.”The new bill would permit police and prosecutors to charge anyone found to be a gang member or gang leader. This is given a very broad definition and includes anyone who commits, coerces, conspires with or hires somebody else to commit violent crimes such as murder, rape and assault; or profits from the proceeds of burglaries, drug sales, or gun sales.
“Without RICO, certain felony convictions would draw prison sentences of eight to 12 years,” says Boyd Patterson, a former-prosecutor turned gangs initiative co-czar in Chattanooga. “With RICO, the penalty jumps to 12 to 20 years,” a substantial difference if you’re on the wrong end of the new sentencing structure.
Federal RICO cases often take three to five years to make and to prosecute and can be very expensive and laborious processes. Patterson says that “We may have two or three cases against two or three folks. If our goal is a dozen gang members, it’s gonna take that much longer.” The new legislation will mean that when the police do bring charges they can level them against the entire gang, rather than putting people away piecemeal.
Co-sponsor Senator Bo Watson (R-Hixson) says legislators objected to toughening penalties for repeat offenders. “It’s a matter of cost,” he says. “A greater cost of incarceration, and that draws the fiscal note up to where that really wasn’t a piece of legislation we could move this year.”
Supporters have estimated that the cost of longer sentences will already add $109,000 to the yearly corrections budget. Had the backers pushed for even more stringent penalties Senator Watson says the total cost of incarceration could have increased by $1.4 million.
Governor Haslam is expected to sign the bill; and, it will become law on July 1.
Sources:
-“Police Chief: ‘There’s a lot more bite to this law’,” by Gordon Boyd, published at WRCBTV.com.
-HB2868
Earlier:
Prosecutor’s Note Questioning Witnesses’ Credibility Leads to a Murderer’s Appeal
Gov. Haslam allows evolution bill to become TN law
Sunday, April 15, 2012
Gov. Haslam allows evolution bill to become TN law
Gov. Bill Haslam allowed House Bill 368/Senate Bill 893, the evolution bill, to become law without his signature. The governor's move is symbolic in that it signals his opposition but allows the measure to be added to the state code. The message sent is, however, confusing. The governor can tell bill supporters that he allowed it to become law, and still he will be able to say to the bill's critics that he refused to sign the legislation. Both statements are true, but neither shows leadership.
The Tennessean reports that the bill became law in Tennessee, "despite a veto campaign mounted by scientists and civil libertarians who say it will reopen a decades-old controversy over teaching creationism to the state’s schoolchildren." Supporters of the law say it simply allows teachers to critique subjects like evolution or global warming without fear of discipline.
Critics of the legislation say that the purpose of the law is to allow teachers to promote their personal beliefs in the classroom. The law creates an opportunity for teachers--who may wish to openly challenge the science of evolution with religious beliefs of creationism and intelligent design--to do so.
Here are the principal passages of the new law.
"The teaching of some scientific subjects, including, but not limited to, biological evolution, the chemical origins of life, global warming, and human cloning, can cause controversy. Some teachers may be unsure of the expectations concerning how they should present information on such subjects. Teachers shall be permitted to help students understand, analyze, critique, and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories covered in the course being taught. {No school official}...shall prohibit any teacher in a public school system of this state from helping students understand, analyze, critique, and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories covered in the course being taught. This section only protects the teaching of scientific information, and shall not be construed to promote any religious or non-religious doctrine, promote discrimination for or against a particular set of religious beliefs or non-beliefs, or promote discrimination for or against religion or non-religion."
On its face, you can say that this law protects teachers who may wish to criticize evolution and that it allows teachers to counsel students on the weaknesses of evolution, global warming, and human cloning. While many may applaud that move by the Tennessee legislature, it seems that all it really accomplishes is to muddy the waters of established science.
Teachers should educate our children with the best science and technologies that the world has to offer. Doing so is the only way the next generation will compete in tomorrow's ever-shrinking global economy.
Below are two tables that show how American students compete in science against their global peers. Students in seven countries scored higher than U.S. 4th-graders in physical science, while in life science and earth science students in three countries scored higher than U.S. 4th-graders. U.S. 8th-graders were outperformed by 8th-graders of another country in 10 instances in physics, in 9 instances in chemistry, and in 5 instances in both biology and earth science.
Table A-16-1. Average science and content domain scale scores of 4th-grade students, by country: 2007
| Country (ordered by total score) | Total science | Content domain | ||||||
| Life science | Physical science | Earth science | ||||||
| TIMSS scale average | 500 | ▼ | 500 | ▼ | 500 | ▼ | 500 | ▼ |
| Singapore | 587 | ▲ | 582 | ▲ | 585 | ▲ | 554 | ▲ |
| Chinese Taipei | 557 | ▲ | 541 | 559 | ▲ | 553 | ▲ | |
| Hong Kong SAR1 | 554 | ▲ | 532 | 558 | ▲ | 560 | ▲ | |
| Japan | 548 | ▲ | 530 | ▼ | 564 | ▲ | 529 | |
| Russian Federation | 546 | 539 | 547 | ▲ | 536 | |||
| Latvia2 | 542 | 535 | 544 | ▲ | 536 | |||
| England | 542 | 532 | ▼ | 543 | ▲ | 538 | ||
| United States3,4 | 539 | 540 | 534 | 533 | ||||
| Hungary | 536 | 548 | ▲ | 529 | 517 | ▼ | ||
| Italy | 535 | 549 | ▲ | 521 | ▼ | 526 | ||
Table A-16-2. Average science and content domain scale scores of 8th-grade students, by country: 2007
| Country (ordered by total score) | Total science | Content domain | ||||||||
| Biology | Chemistry | Physics | Earth science | |||||||
| TIMSS scale average | 500 | ▼ | 500 | ▼ | 500 | ▼ | 500 | 500 | ▼ | |
| Singapore | 567 | ▲ | 564 | ▲ | 560 | ▲ | 575 | ▲ | 541 | ▲ |
| Chinese Taipei | 561 | ▲ | 549 | ▲ | 573 | ▲ | 554 | ▲ | 545 | ▲ |
| Japan | 554 | ▲ | 553 | ▲ | 551 | ▲ | 558 | ▲ | 533 | |
| Korea, Republic of | 553 | ▲ | 548 | ▲ | 536 | ▲ | 571 | ▲ | 538 | ▲ |
| England1 | 542 | ▲ | 541 | ▲ | 534 | ▲ | 545 | ▲ | 529 | |
| Hungary | 539 | ▲ | 534 | 536 | ▲ | 541 | ▲ | 531 | ||
| Czech Republic | 539 | ▲ | 531 | 535 | ▲ | 537 | ▲ | 534 | ▲ | |
| Slovenia | 538 | ▲ | 530 | 539 | ▲ | 524 | ▲ | 542 | ▲ | |
| Hong Kong SAR1,2 | 530 | 527 | 517 | 528 | ▲ | 532 | ||||
| Russian Federation | 530 | ▲ | 525 | 535 | ▲ | 519 | ▲ | 525 | ||
| United States1,3 | 520 | 530 | 510 | 503 | 525 | |||||
Three questions to Governor Haslam and the Tennessee legislature. (1) Given the international competition for jobs and innovation, is now the time to water down quality science education? (2) Will Tennessee be a place for ground-breaking science and technology if our school-age children continue to fall behind in science? (3) Who will lead the change in thinking that international business work requires?
In this world of global competition the cheer that "USA is Number One" needs to be in science.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)