U.S. District Judge William Steele didn't want to order Patrick Lett, a 17-year Army veteran who served two tours in Iraq, to prison after the former soldier pleaded guilty to cocaine possession. But the judge thought the law required prison time.

When Steele learned differently, he reduced the punishment to 11 days of time served and three years of supervised release. That didn't satisfy prosecutors, who appealed the lighter sentence on the grounds that Steele didn't have the authority to change the initial five-year sentence.

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the judge could not undo his sentence, and the Supreme Court rejected Lett's appeal of that decision without comment.

A new sentencing hearing is set for Oct. 24, though one of Lett's attorneys said a delay may be needed to prepare arguments.

Attorney Douglas Berman of Ohio State University's Moritz College of Law in Columbus said Monday that defense attorneys are expected to argue Lett initially had ineffective legal representation.

A Justice Department spokesman was not immediately available for comment on the high court's ruling.

At the initial sentencing, Steele noted that Lett had led "an exemplary life up until the time of the offenses and even after," when Lett re-enlisted and served another 17 months before his indictment.

Lett, now 39, pleaded guilty to cocaine possession for his involvement in a cousin's drug operation.

Lett works full time doing fiber optics work at a shipyard in Pascagoula, Miss. His two children, who live with Lett's mother, visit him on weekends. He supports his family as a single parent, his attorney said.

The first day of the court's new term, which is set in law as the first Monday in October, included denials of hundreds of appeals. Chief Justice John Roberts opened the new session in a crowded courtroom that included retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

Last term, the justices handed down several opinions that limited state regulation of business in favor of federal power. Several justices posed skeptical questions in this term's first case, whether federal law prevents smokers from using consumer protection laws to go after tobacco companies for their marketing of "light" and "low tar" cigarettes.

The companies are facing dozens of such lawsuits across the country.

The federal cigarette labeling law bars states from regulating any aspect of cigarette advertising that involves smoking and health.

"How do you tell it's deceptive or not if you don't look at what the relationship is between smoking and health?," Chief Justice John Roberts said during oral arguments on the case.

Three Maine residents sued Altria Group Inc. and its Philip Morris USA Inc. subsidiary under the state's law against unfair marketing practices. The class-action claim represents all smokers of Marlboro Lights or Cambridge Lights cigarettes, both made by Philip Morris.

The lawsuit argues that the company knew for decades that smokers of light cigarettes compensate for the lower levels of tar and nicotine by taking longer puffs and compensating in other ways.

A federal district court threw out the lawsuit, but the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said it could go forward.

The role of the Federal Trade Commission could be important in the outcome. The FTC is only now proposing to change rules that for years condoned the use of "light" and "low tar" in advertising the cigarettes, despite evidence that smokers were getting a product as dangerous as regular cigarettes.

Five GOP state lawmakers, in a brief filed Monday, say the inquiry has exceeded its authority and is too political.

Palin is the focus of a legislative investigation into allegations she abused her power by firing her public safety commissioner. The commissioner says he was pressured to dismiss a state trooper who was involved in a messy divorce with Palin's sister.

Investigators are scheduled to submit a report on the investigation Friday. Oral arguments are scheduled for Wednesday.

Top officials with the firm that contracts to run Metrolink trains made their first public comments Sunday night about last month's deadly head-on collision of a passenger train with a Union Pacific freight train in Chatsworth.

"Words cannot express how saddened we are over the loss of life and injuries suffered in this terrible accident," said Veolia Transportation Chief Executive Mark Joseph in a written statement given to The Times. "Our hearts are broken and our entire company is stricken with grief."

"Whether the result of human error, system failure, or other causes, we will share in the broad responsibility of finding solutions to lessen the risks inherent in passenger rail service," Joseph added. "Public transportation is an essential service for everyday life in this country, and this tragedy underscores more than ever before the need of improving our public transportation systems."

In an interview in San Diego, where Veolia officials are attending a mass transit convention this week, Joseph emphasized the firm's safety record and said Veolia is participating in the investigation of the crash by the National Transportation Safety Board.

Veolia officials said that the NTSB has asked them not to discuss the crash while the probe continues, and they declined comment on all questions relating to potential causes of the crash, which killed 25 people. They also declined to discuss the personnel record of Robert Sanchez, the engineer of the Metrolink train who was an employee of Veolia and who was killed in the crash.

The NTSB has said the Metrolink train ran a red signal intended to stop the train before entering a stretch of single track in use by an eastbound Union Pacific freight train.

In addition, the NTSB has said preliminary data indicates that 57 text messages were sent from or received by Sanchez's cellphone while he was on duty on the day of the crash, including one sent 22 seconds before the collision. The agency, however, cautioned that the precise timing of the messages needed to be verified.

"I think up to this accident, we had the strongest [cellphone] policy in the business given the ones I'd seen," said Ronald J. Hartman, an executive vice president for rail for Veolia.

Hartman said Veolia's policy prohibits cellphone use by engineers and requires that devices be turned off and out of reach while engineers are in the cab of a locomotive. He said Veolia engineers encounter supervisors on a daily basis and that supervisors check for cellphone usage.

He added that Veolia supervisors sometimes call engineers' cellphones -- when the numbers for those phones are available -- to see if engineers are using phones while operating trains.

http://www.rkallp.com/metrolink-disaster-lawyers.html

The justices did not comment Monday in turning down a dozen individuals and two groups that oppose abortion rights. The court turned down similar appeals in 2003 and 2006.

Four physicians and abortion clinics sued in 1995 after the activists released a Wild West-style poster that named a dozen abortion doctors underneath the headline, "Wanted." A related Web site, titled the "Nuremberg Files," declared the doctors guilty of crimes against humanity, and listed their addresses and telephone numbers.

In 1999, a jury awarded the doctors and clinics more than $100 million under racketeering laws and a 1994 federal law that makes it illegal to incite violence against abortion doctors. Courts reduced the judgment to more than $16 million.

The activists say the verdict violated their free speech rights under the Constitution.

Without comment, the justices declined to consider Englewood, Colo.-based Dish's appeal.

In January, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit agreed with a lower court that digital video recorders distributed by Dish, formerly known as EchoStar Communications Corp., violated the software elements of Alviso,Calif.-based TiVo's patent. The ruling overturned the lower court's finding that Dish also infringed on the patent's hardware elements.

TiVo issued a statement saying it was "extremely pleased" with the Supreme Court's decision and said company lawyers would press for Dish to pay financial damages.

TiVo sued in 2004, alleging that EchoStar, a satellite broadcaster, infringed on TiVo's patented technology that allows viewers to record one program while watching another. EchoStar Communications changed its name to Dish in late 2007.

TiVo pioneered digital video recorders that allow viewers to pause, rewind and fast forward live television shows.

The lower court had ordered Dish to shut down the 3 million digital video recorders used by its customers because they use TiVo's technology, but that order was put on hold pending appeal.

Dish Network has said that the ruling would not affect its customers because the company had developed and distributed new DVR software that "does not infringe the Tivo patent at issue in the Federal Circuit's ruling."