LOS ANGELES, April 21, 2008 — Philip E. Daniels has joined the Century Cityoffice of Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP as a member of the firm's Entertainment& Media transactional practice group. Daniels, who is dually qualified in both California and the UK, joinsfrom boutique law firm Goldring, Hertz & Lichtenstein in Beverly Hills.

Daniels specializes in all matters relating to music,new media and technology.  His digitaland technology expertise includes structuring, drafting and providing strategicadvice on deals for Internet and mobile platforms, as well as advising clientsoperating in the social networking space on the development and distribution ofdigital content and digital premium goods. Daniels negotiated deals with Yahoo, MSN, Bebo, Daily Motion and MySpacefor the distribution of content along with a number of technologyinfrastructure agreements around the provision of social networking tools anddelivery content.

Daniels began his legal career in London.  He practiced with a number of UK law firms, includingthe well-recognized London boutique Lee & Thompson, representinginternational entertainment and technology clients.  Daniels also worked in-house at BBC Worldwide,where his responsibilities included the company's Internet and Interactivedivisions.

"Philip's music industry expertise and international entertainmentexperience are an excellent complement to the global matters which wehandle," said Bob Darwell, chair of the firm's Entertainment & Mediapractice group.  "His experience in newmedia and digital business transactions is a perfect fit for our practicegroup, which crosses over all areas of the entertainment and media industriesand intersects with the technology sector."

Commented Daniels, "Sheppard Mullin has built a top-notch Entertainmentpractice and I am thrilled about joining the group in Century City.  I am very impressed by how Bob has grown theteam, and by the high profile international clients they represent and thematters they handle." 

Daniels graduated from Nottingham Law School (UK) in 1996 and earned aB.Sc. (Hons) from Bristol University (UK) in 1994.  He is the latest in a recent flurry ofattorneys joining Sheppard Mullin's Entertainment & Media practice group inthe firm's Century City office. Lastmonth, Robb Klein joined as special counsel in the firm's Entertainment &Media practice group from the London office of European law firm SJ Berwin LLP. Additionally, Jim Curry joined theoffice in March as an Entertainment and Media litigation partner.  Curry most recently practiced as a foundingpartner with White O'Connor Curry LLP in Century City.

Sheppard Mullin has 40 attorneys based in its Century City office andthe Entertainment & Media practice group includes more than 55 attorneysfirmwide. 

About Sheppard Mullin Richter &Hampton LLP

A New Haven-based law firm dove into the fray over People's United Bank's alleged failure to protect customers' information from Dumpster divers. "We don't comment on pending litigation," said People's spokeswoman Valerie Carlson, of the new lawsuit filed in Bridgeport Superior Court Monday.

Michael Stratton, partner and founder of the firm Stratton Faxon, said he notified an attorney for People's of his intention to seek class action status for a suit filed on behalf of five customers worried their information could have been exposed to identity theft by the bank's alleged failure to properly dispose of private information.

"Some People's Bank customers were pretty upset," Stratton said after reading a Connecticut Post report that Fairfield resident James Hastings had spent months pulling many unshredded papers listing private information, including account and Social Security numbers, from trash bins at branches in Fairfield County.

The bank didn't know about Hastings' activities until Hastings showed up at its headquarters with a video depicting him rummaging through the trash and pulling out documents. Hastings still has documents he culled from branch Dumpsters, although police raided his home and seized some documents. The bank is suing Hastings; that case begins today in Bridgeport Superior Court.

New Jersey's Supreme Court found that the state's constitution gives greater protection against unreasonable searches and seizures than the U.S. Constitution.

The court ruled that Internet providers should not disclose private information to anyone without a subpoena.

A Washington lawyer who handles Internet litigation, Megan E. Gray, said the ruling "seems to be consistent with a trend nationwide, but not a strong trend."

"It's contrary to what is happening with rights of privacy at the federal level," Gray said. "But it's all over the board for the states, with a mild trend toward protecting this information."

Grayson Barber, a lawyer representing the American Civil Liberties Union, Electronic Frontier Foundation and the Electronic Privacy Information Center, among other groups that filed friend-of-the-court briefs in the case, said it was the first ruling in the nation to recognize a reasonable expectation of privacy for Internet users.

The court blocked the executions of Thomas Arthur of Alabama, Earl Wesley Berry of Mississippi and Carlton Turner of Texas last fall while it considered a challenge to Kentucky's lethal injection procedures.

The high court ruled 7-2 last week that the procedures are not cruel, and the justices' last-minute orders temporarily sparing the three inmates automatically expired when the justices denied their appeals Monday.

Lisa Smith, a Dallas County assistant district attorney who handles capital cases, said Monday that the execution of Turner, who was convicted of killing his parents, likely will be set for summer.

Her absence wasn't a result of a scheduling conflict. She was dead. And Giles killed her.

Three California courts that have considered Giles' claim have said, in effect, "You must be kidding."

Now, though, the Supreme Court, in arguments scheduled for Tuesday, is hearing Giles' case to see whether the use during his trial of statements the girlfriend made to a Los Angeles police officer violated his constitutional right to confront witnesses against him.

The issue the court has agreed to resolve is when defendants forfeit that right. It is already clear that a defendant who kills someone to prevent him from testifying may not come into court and seek to exclude prior statements by the dead person.

But this case is one in which there were no charges pending against Giles when he shot Brenda Avie dead with a 9-millimeter handgun outside his grandmother's house in September 2002.

A few weeks earlier, Avie told a police officer that Giles assaulted and threatened to kill her. The officer testified about the conversation at Giles' trial, over his lawyer's objection.

Giles claimed he acted in self-defense, fearing that Avie was armed. She wasn't. Giles also testified that Avie behaved erratically and threatened to kill both him and his new girlfriend on the night she died.