The Iowa Court of Appeals said Officer Michael Mette's trial judge had no testimony on which to base her ruling that he could have walked away from a fight with another man — but didn't.

Mette had argued self-defense in the 2005 fight in Dubuque with Jake Gothard that left Gothard with a fractured nose, cheek and jaw.

In November 2006, First Judicial District Judge Monica Ackley found Mette guilty of assault causing serious injury and sentenced him to five years. She said Mette was not the initial aggressor but could have retreated.

The case prompted an outcry in Chicago, where prominent officials, including Chicago Mayor Richard Daley, Cook County State's Attorney Richard Devine and Chicago Police Superintendent Jody Weis, had called for Mette's release.

In its ruling, the appeals court found that there was no testimony to support Ackley's findings.

U.S. District Judge James Gwin in Cleveland issued a temporary restraining order forcing Madison County to follow Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner's instructions. The county had said that, one the advice of its county prosecutor, it was not going to allow same-day voting during the six-day window that runs through Oct. 6.

It was the first of three court decisions involving an early voting window that has become a highly partisan battle.

Both Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's campaign and the Republican National Committee have urged supporters in Ohio to use the early voting. But there are Republican-backed lawsuits against it.

The state GOP has filed a statewide challenge to the voting window in federal court in Columbus. A hearing was scheduled for Monday.

Two GOP-backed voters also have filed a lawsuit in the Ohio Supreme Court, which could rule Monday.

The two lawsuits argue that Ohio law requires voters to be registered for at least 30 days before they cast an absentee ballot. Republicans have said Ohio law doesn't allow same-day registration and voting, and have accused Brunner, a Democrat, of reading a partisan interpretation into law to benefit her own party.

The disputed voting window results from an overlap between Tuesday's beginning of absentee voting 35 days before Election Day, and the Oct. 6 end of voter registration period.

The court unanimously agreed with Jeremy Jaynes' argument that the law violates the free-speech protections of the First Amendment because it does not just restrict commercial e-mails — it restricts other unsolicited messages as well. Most other states also have anti-spam laws, and there is a federal CAN-SPAM Act as well, but those laws apply only to commercial e-mail pitches.

The Virginia law "is unconstitutionally overbroad on its face because it prohibits the anonymous transmission of all unsolicited bulk e-mails, including those containing political, religious or other speech protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution," Justice G. Steven Agee wrote.

Agee wrote that "were the Federalist Papers just being published today via e-mail, that transmission by Publius would violate the statute." Publius was the pseudonym used by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay in essays urging ratification of the Constitution.

U.S. District Judge James Spencer denied a preliminary injunction sought by The Real Truth About Obama Inc. against the Federal Election Commission. The injunction would have barred the FEC from enforcing its fundraising and advertising regulations against the Richmond-based group, which was formed by anti-abortion activists.

The organization claimed in court papers that its "issue advocacy" amounts to constitutionally protected free speech that does not expressly advocate the election or defeat of a candidate.

In a brief order, Spencer said the constitutional claim lacked merit and that an injunction would harm the public. He did not elaborate but said a written explanation of his ruling will be issued later.

James Bopp Jr. of Terre Haute, Ind., attorney for The Real Truth About Obama, said he likely will ask the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for an expedited appeal of Spencer's ruling.

"The purpose of the First Amendment is to protect our ability to speak about issues and candidates and do so in a timely way," said Bopp.

Kent was to make his first court appearance Wednesday after being indicted last week on federal sex crimes following a Department of Justice investigation. He is facing two counts of abusive sexual contact and one count of attempted aggravated sexual abuse.

If convicted of attempted aggravated sexual abuse, Kent could face up to life in prison and a fine of up to $250,000. Each of the two counts of abusive sexual contact carries a sentence of up to two years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000.

Kent's attorney, Dick DeGuerin, has said his client is innocent and will stay on the bench while he awaits trial.

Kent's former case manager, Cathy McBroom, accused the judge of physically harassing her in a sexual manner over a four-year period, starting in 2003. The final incident was in March 2007, when she said the judge pulled up her blouse and bra and tried to escalate contact until they were interrupted.

Her accusations were first investigated by the Judicial Council of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which suspended Kent in September 2007 for four months with pay but didn't detail the allegations against him.

As part of the judicial council's punishment, Kent was transferred to the busy Houston federal courthouse, where McBroom was relocated after reporting her allegations. Kent had been the only U.S. District Court judge in Galveston, an island beach town 50 miles southeast of Houston.

Until his indictment, Kent was known for writing humorous rulings peppered with sarcastic scoldings of lawyers. Kent, a federal jurist in Galveston since President George H.W. Bush appointed him in 1990, has not presided over any high-profile cases.

Kent is the first federal judge to be charged with sex crimes. Most other indictments of federal judges have involved corruption or other financial misdeeds.

Dan Webb also said the rules for the hearing would greatly hamper Kilpatrick's defense. He asked for a 14-day restraining order to suspend the proceedings, scheduled to start Wednesday.

"There are some very basic rights that clearly have to be applied," Webb told Wayne County Circuit Judge Robert Ziolkowski.

The judge said he had planned to go fishing but would work on the case over the holiday weekend and make a ruling Tuesday.

The Detroit City Council is asking Granholm to use her constitutional power to remove Kilpatrick from office for misconduct.

The mayor is accused of misleading council members into approving an $8.4 million settlement with fired police officers. The council says it didn't know the deal included provisions to keep a cover on romantic text messages between Kilpatrick and a top aide.

Kilpatrick's lawyers filed a lawsuit Thursday, claiming the mayor can't get a fair hearing from the governor. A key argument: Granholm held a private meeting in May to try to settle Kilpatrick's criminal perjury case and get him to resign.