Los Angeles Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

Los Angeles criminal defense attorneys know that law enforcement officers use a variety of tactics to pressure or coerce people into providing them with information.

But if you or someone you love is accused of a crime in Los Angeles, something very important to remember is this: Never speak to police without your defense attorney present.

This is important even if you are not the person facing criminal charges. People think that lawyers are only for the accused.

But here are some things to consider:

First of all, if you speak to police without a lawyer, you are potentially hurting the chances of your loved one getting a solid and fair defense. Police aren't going to tell you all the information they have on the case (and in fact, they may lie to you). So you may unwittingly be giving away details that could be vital, without even realizing it.

And secondly, speaking to police without your attorney puts you in a potentially precarious situation of possibly facing your own criminal charges. This could be something as simple as admitting you provided your loved one with money or a place to stay. Maybe you didn't even realize at the time that he or she was wanted for a crime.

Either way, talking with a Los Angeles criminal defense attorney first is critical.

A recent example of how this can turn out badly for relatives of the accused is the case of the wife and mother of a man named Adam Mayes. You've probably heard of this case, as it's been all over the news in recent weeks.

According to police, Mayes allegedly kidnapped a woman and her three daughters in the Midwest. He then allegedly killed the mother and eldest daughter before taking off with the younger two, whom he apparently believed were his own children, though that's been disputed.

Police found Mayes in a wooded area weeks later. He committed suicide in front of police and the two youngest girls, who were reportedly unharmed, other than suffering dehydration and insect bites.

Police have charged his 65-year-old mother and 30-year-old wife. The wife has been charged with four counts of especially aggravated kidnapping and the mother has been charged with conspiracy to commit four counts of especially aggravated kidnapping. A conviction on these charges ranges from 15 to 60 years in prison.

This is far more serious than simply aiding and abetting.

The two were arrested before Mayes and the two youngest girls were found. They had been interviewed by police prior to their arrests. The two likely figured that because police were after Mayes himself, they weren't at risk for criminal charges.

Detectives can be masters at getting people to talk. They will employ tactics such as good-cop, bad-cop. They will tell you they already have an open-and-shut case and that you're only hurting yourself by remaining silent. They'll tell you that you'll be let go if you just tell them what happened.

The truth of the matter, though, is that it is not a fair fight unless you have a Los Angeles criminal defense lawyer at your side. Don't make the mistake of entering that interrogation room without one.

Continue reading "Los Angeles Criminal Defense: Family and Law Enforcement Pressure" »

Criminal charges against a Los Angeles sex offender have been dropped, after a judge found that it was not his fault that his employers did not conduct a thorough background check.

Our Los Angeles sex offender defense attorneys know that according to California's Megan's Law, which went into effect in 1996, those convicted of certain sexually-motivated offenses must register with their local law enforcement. Those offenders are required to update their information every three months. The local law enforcement agency then passes that information on to the state's department of justice. In turn, the justice department updates an internet information website.

Not every single offender is going to show up on that website, however, and those who have been convicted of certain offenses (sexual battery by restraint, which is under California Penal Code 243.4, misdemeanor child molestation, under California Penal Code 647.6 and any a few others) can apply to be excluded from the site.

However, what this law does not say is that the Los Angeles sex offender has to notify his or her employer of their status. It's incumbent upon the employer to research this information - assuming an individual does not use a fictitious name. And that's the issue here.

According to The Los Angeles Times, this case involved a Hollywood casting director. Back in 1996, he was convicted of kidnapping an 8-year-old. Because of this, he was required under Megan's Law to register as a sex offender - which he did, using his full name and no aliases.

In his role as a casting director, he reportedly used a shortened version of his legal name, which was his first and middle name. He was employed to cast young actors and actresses in films such as "The Three Stooges" and "Super 8."

He was arrested back in December after Director J.J. Abrams and others within the industry learned of sex offender status. The defendant in this case was charged with failing to comply with the part of Megan's law that mandates offenders to notify law enforcement within five days if he or she changes their name.

Now, if this individual had only used his first and last name, even on tax forms and on his driver's license and other state documents, that might have been an issue. However, the court found that he did use his full name on those, as well as his passport. The judge ruled that every single studio was fully aware of his true and legal name.

The judge did express some concern that parents of the children who were auditioning for him would not have been able to search the sex offender registry to find the name he used on his resume, voicemail and e-mail. However, the judge found the defendant did not violate any laws because his employer knew his full name, which was available on his payroll forms and tax documents. In other words, there was nothing to stop his bosses from obtaining this information if they so chose.

What's more, the defendant had used the shortened version of his name as a stage name prior to his offense. He was trying to amass a body of work, and he told the judge he had been careful to follow all state laws because he never wanted to go back to prison. He didn't consider his stage name an alias.

While he won this court battle, he has lost his career. No studios would agree to hire him when his sex offender status became known.

Of course, the line walked with regard to sex offender registration is a fine one. If you are a sex offender in need of legal advice, contact the attorneys at Stephen G. Rodriguez & Partners.

Continue reading "Los Angeles Sex Offenders Can't be Punished by Employers' Lack of Due Diligence" »

A Los Angeles perjury defense and fraud defense have paid off for city councilman Richard Alarcon.

Our Los Angeles defense attorneys had been following the case, in which the councilman and his wife had been accused of lying about where they lived so that he could run for the 7th District council seat.

The dismissal, it seems, may have come down to prosecutorial failures when it came to presenting evidence to the grand jury.

To briefly explain: A grand jury is an investigatory body that is empowered to investigate complaints, serve as a watchdog on local government agencies and assist in criminal matters at the request of prosecutors. As part of that last duty, grand juries can decide whether to indict an individual on criminal charges, based on the arguments made by prosecutors.

Now, an indictment isn't a conviction - it's simply an affirmation that the prosecutor's office may have a case, and permission to pursue it in court. The law says that prosecutors have a responsibility to present both sides of the case. That is, they have to tell the grand jury not only their findings, but the stance of the defense as well. That information is crucial for the grand jury to be able to make an impartial decision about whether criminal charges are warranted.

So what happened here?

According to The Los Angeles Times, the U.S. Attorney's Office failed to adequately present the available evidence that would have undercut its own case - that is, the defense's side or information that would have been favorable to Alarcon. The prosecutor was accused of being "very dismissive" of the evidence that would have boosted Alarcon's case.

As a result, the grand jury returned a 24-count indictment against Alarcon, which included charges of voter fraud and perjury. Perjury, under California Penal Code 118, is basically a legal way of saying you lied. But it's not just any lie. Perjury is a lie that happens either when you're testifying in court, or being deposed (that is, questioned by attorneys regarding a legal matter), in signing an affidavit or declaration or on a signed certificate. Prosecutors have to show that you purposely made a statement knowing it wasn't true and that the statement was a "material" or important fact. This could mean anything from providing false information on your driver's license to testifying to falsehoods in open court.

In this case, Alarcon was accused of providing false information to the government, indicating he lived somewhere other than where he actually did, so that he could run for political office. He pleaded not guilty to those charges.

Prosecutors say they disagree with the judge's dismissal, and are reviewing whether they will appeal it or seek some other legal remedy.

Continue reading "Los Angeles Perjury Defense Required for L.A. Councilman" »

A recent case of a Los Angeles hit-and-run has captivated local residents, firing up law enforcement agencies to search aggressively for the suspects.

It involves a 7-year-old girl, who was left in a coma and whose father has died.

Los Angeles hit-and-run defense attorneys are familiar with California Vehicle Code 20001 VC, which mandates that drivers involved in a crash have a duty to stop, regardless of whether someone has been injured.

A Los Angeles hit-and-run charge can be filed either as a misdemeanor or a felony, depending on the severity of injuries and the actions of the at-fault driver.

But even if you aren't at-fault in the crash, you could be prosecuted for hit-and-run if you don't immediately stop, give your identifying information, provide "reasonable" assistance if anyone is injured and immediately contact police. Those are your obligations - regardless of any other circumstances.

It should be noted, however, that you don't have to provide any statement to law enforcement officials before you consult with your Los Angeles criminal defense attorney.

If you do commit a hit-and-run but no one is seriously hurt, you're looking at a sentence of up to 1 year in jail or prison and fines of between $1,000 and $10,000. However, if someone is seriously hurt or killed, then you're looking at serving at least two and four years incarceration, in addition to the fines.

There are some other circumstances that could increase those penalties. For example, if you're fleeing a crime scene when you then hit a vehicle and flee, then we're talking about a possible five-year prison sentence. If you were drunk at the time (part of the reason a lot of people flee in the first place), then you would additionally face Los Angeles DUI or DUI manslaughter charges.

Here's what we know so far about the most recent Los Angeles hit-and-run case:

A 38-year-old man, his 7-year-old daughter and other members of his family were crossing Watts Avenue and Santa Ana Boulevard in Watts when they were allegedly struck by the driver of a white Cadillac.

According to The Los Angeles Times, the driver did stop for a moment, but then took off, reportedly driving over the father and daughter as he did so.

The father died at the hospital, while the 7-year-old remains in a coma in critical condition.

Assuming police eventually make an arrest, one issue that may come up in trial is the design of the intersection itself. A number of parents have reportedly complained about it, saying it was an accident waiting to happen.

In order to secure a conviction on a hit-and-run charge, prosecutors have to prove that you were involved, that you knew an accident had occurred and that you knew someone was hurt or killed and that you intentionally failed to carry out one of your above-mentioned duties.

Even if it seems the evidence against you is somewhat overwhelming, there are effective approaches that a skilled attorney can take that can sometimes result in lowered or dropped charges.

Continue reading "Los Angeles Hit-and-Run Suspect Sought By Police" »

A Los Angeles robbery defense is going to be required for a man whom both local police and FBI have teamed up to find.

Los Angeles robbery defense attorneys understand that the individual in question - who hasn't yet been identified - is suspected of robbing at least 10 banks in Orange County - including banks in Laguna Hills, Ladera Ranch, Corona del Mar, Irvine and Anaheim Hills.

He's been dubbed the "Snowboarder Bandit" because he is regularly seen wearing a beanie hat and sunglasses. He appears to be young and wears clothes you might see on the slopes rather than in a stick-up.

He is reportedly considered the most active serial bank robber in the country, and there is a $10,000 reward for information leading to his arrest and subsequent conviction.

According to California Penal Code 211, robbery is defined as taking someone's property from that person's body or from his or her immediate possession and doing so by force or fear. It's a felony, and a single charge can result in two to nine years in state prison.

However, because these crimes involve banks, which are federally-backed institutions, the FBI is involved, which means this individual will likely be tried in federal court under U.S. Code 1349.

Because most individuals aren't going to be prosecuted with robbery under federal statutes, we're going to focus primarily here on the state laws.

A lot of people get burglary and robbery confused, but they are actually two very different crimes. Burglary has to do with entry into a structure, home or vehicle. It's not necessary for prosecutors to prove you took anything in order to convict you of burglary. However, because theft is most often the primary intention in a burglary, those charges regularly are filed hand-in-hand.

A robbery, on the other hand, is when you take property that doesn't belong to you, that you took it directly from another person, that you took it against his or her will, that you used force or threats and that you intentionally meant to take the property.

Penalties for robbery are going to depend on circumstances of the case, but you're generally looking at between two and six years in prison. Under state law, you can face stricter penalties if the robbery was committed while you were acting in operation with a street gang or if someone was seriously hurt or if you used a gun.

What's more, because robbery is considered a violent offense, a conviction would mean one strike against you under the state's Three Strike's Law. If it's your second strike, your sentence could double. If it's your third strike, you could be facing 25 years to life in prison.

In this case, the defendant is almost always seen on video surveillance wearing some form of identity disguise. This is usually hats, sunglasses, and even motorcycle helmets. One might think this would be enough to conceal an identity, but now police have taken all of those collective images from the videos and created a sketch, which they have since released to the public.

Continue reading "Los Angeles Robbery Suspect, "Snowboarder Bandit," Sought" »

Los Angeles domestic violence attorneys have been watching the developments regarding the sheriff of San Francisco, who has been suspended from his post - and refused reinstatement - following spousal abuse accusations.

Los Angeles domestic violence defense cases fall under the purview of California Penal Code 273.5. The exact name of the charge is "corporal injury on a spouse, cohabitant or fellow parent." It's also sometimes called spousal battery or domestic abuse.

It is basically when you are accused of intentionally inflicting injury upon a current or former spouse or a person you live with or have lived with or the mother or father of your child.

In order to prove the case, prosecutors have to show that you inflicted some sort of injury on one of this parties, that you did so on purpose and that the injury resulted in a "traumatic condition." That last part could be anything from a scratch or scrape to broken bones or a concussion.

These cases are frequently charged with high emotion, and frequently, witness testimony is clouded by the presence of alcohol, which in many cases has been known to fuel these situations.

Penalties for a conviction can be serious. The charge itself can be filed as a misdemeanor or felony, depending on the severity of injury and other facts unique to each case - namely, the criminal history of the accused.

For a misdemeanor conviction, you're looking at a minimum of three years mandatory probation, as well as up to one year in jail, up to $6,000 in fines and payment to a battered women's shelter and/or counseling. For a felony conviction, it can mean up to five years in prison (if you have a prior conviction for the same offense; otherwise, it's four years), a "strike" on your record, per the state's Three Strikes Law, and all of the probation requirements that you would be mandated to complete if you had been convicted of a felony.

Defense attorneys can take a few different tacks in cases like these. If there was indeed an injury, attorneys may seek to show that they were inflicted in either self-defense or they were accidental. Another approach may be that the accusation is false. This can happen in the form of exaggeration or flat-out lies on the part of the alleged victim.

In this case, San Francisco Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi was originally arrested following an argument with his Venezuelan wife over whether she could take the couple's son to her native country. He reportedly grabbed her arm, and she suffered a bruise.

The sheriff later pleaded guilty to a lesser misdemeanor charge of false imprisonment, rather than have the case go to trial. He was sentenced to three years of probation and 100 hours of community service and a full year of domestic violence courses, as well as payment of nearly $600 in fines and fees.

However, he's still fighting for his job. A judge recently refused to reinstate him, and now, an ethics committee spear-headed by the city is going to decide whether the elected official should be removed from office because of the conviction.

While his case is decidedly more high-profile than most, it still underscores the importance of having an experienced Los Angeles domestic violence attorney at your side throughout the entire process.

Continue reading "Los Angeles Domestic Violence Conviction for Top Cop" »

A man whose Los Angeles homicide defense failed him nearly 25 years ago has been set free on bail, affirming the innocence he has maintained through all those years of incarceration.

Our Los Angeles homicide defense attorneys are pleased to see that justice has finally been granted for this individual, accused of gunning down a maintenance worker at an apartment complex. However, this situation highlights some of the fundamental flaws in the justice system with regard to overzealous detectives and prosecutors.

While DNA evidence worked in this man's favor - albeit 25 years late - not all of those wrongly accused are lucky enough to have science on their side. While prosecutors more and more like to have this type of proof, it's not always available or in some cases, it's tainted.

This is why if you're ever accused of a Los Angeles homicide - or any crime - it's critical to immediately retain the services of an experienced attorney before making any statement to police. Those who are innocent of a crime feel there is no harm in sharing their side of the story to law enforcement without the presence of a lawyer. They think it shows they have nothing to hide. However, this is not a good idea. The truth of the matter is, police like to close their cases, and they are not looking out for your best interests. You need someone who will. You can still cooperate with authorities after exercising your right to first consult with your attorney.

In this case, it was determined that when the prisoner was tried in 1985, the proceedings were unfair because evidence was withheld from not only the defense, but the prosecution as well. That evidence, according to The Los Angeles Times, goes directly to the question of the defendant's guilt or innocence.

Prosecutors are debating whether to retry the case.

The judge who freed the defendant on bond determined there was evidence indicating that sheriff's detectives did not disclose important evidence that showed another person could have been responsible for the shooting and also that the detectives seemed to have improperly influenced certain witnesses.

The newspaper reports that investigators honed in on him as a suspect after learning that he had been involved in a relationship with the victim's ex-wife, with whom the victim was embroiled in a bitter child custody dispute. The victim had reportedly told his new wife, as he lay dying, that he believed his ex had something to do with it. She was never charged. The suspect fit the description of a tall, skinny blond man. He was identified in a lineup who said he was certain the defendant had pulled the trigger.

Seems solid, right?

So solid that he was convicted by a judge (he opted out of a jury trial), who sentenced him to 25 years to life.

But the suspect maintained his innocence. His case was taken up by a non-profit legal group, committed to working on cases of wrongful conviction.

Then last year, the eyewitness came forward to say he had only caught a short glimpse of the profile of the gunman. The witness wasn't even wearing his glasses. However, the witness said he felt pressured by police to make an ID. The judge later ruled that the procedure detective's used in the ID process was "suggestive," and that they failed to turn over their notes from the investigation.

What's more, the ex-wife reportedly had another boyfriend - also blond-haired and slender. Police knew about this individual at the time of the trial, but did not reveal it to either prosecutors or defense attorneys.

Additionally, the judge was presented with a number of sworn declarations from individuals who stated the ex-wife of the victim had confessed to them her own involvement in the homicide, and said the defendant was in fact innocent.

Continue reading "Los Angeles Homicide Convict Freed After Wrongful Conviction" »

Los Angeles criminal defense attorneys know that when it comes to witnesses testifying in a criminal case, integrity matters.

Jurors who are weighing the Los Angeles criminal defense versus the prosecution's side are going to take into account whether the witnesses are believable. There are a number of factors that can impact that credibility, and a skilled defense attorney knows how to ferret out those details.

However in a recent case involving the so-called "Bling Ring," the Los Angeles criminal defense attorneys won't have to work very hard.

That's because while the defendants have not yet gone to trial, the lead detective not only served as a paid consultant for a movie about the alleged crimes, he also accepted a role playing himself.

The Los Angeles Police Department veteran detective was reportedly paid between $5,000 and $6,000 for his services on the film project.

As one Loyola Law School professor put it: "It's a great birthday present for the defense."

That's because it doesn't look good. It creates a conflict of interest. It creates the appearance that the detective's goal all along was boosting the entertainment value of the case, for which he was being paid. This theory could also be underscored by the way in which he worded the police report, characterizing the crimes as a "twisted adventure," sparked by "celebrity worship" that "mushroomed into organized criminal enterprise." Sounds more like a screenplay than an affidavit.

The detective was also on payroll with one of the alleged suspects, who was also paid as a consultant on the film.

At the very least, it seems unprofessional, and it's an issue that's likely going to come to the surface at trial - if it even makes it that far.

An attorney for one of the defendants was quoted as saying he intends to make those facts known to the jury.

Prosecutors apparently weren't aware of the detective's role in the project until contacted by a reporter. Confronted with that news, prosecutors even said they may have to re-evaluate where they stand - it could be that detrimental.

You may recall, this is the case in which a number of youth, obsessed with fame, are believed to have committed burglaries and thefts at the home of several, high-profile celebrities, including Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan. One of the individuals is serving a four-year sentence, while another has accepted a plea deal for two years. A third, who was also paid as a consultant for the film, served a month of a 180-day sentence and is now on probation. Three more have pleaded not guilty and are slated to go on trial.

The defendant serving the two-year sentence was also offered $20,000 by the filmmaker for his side of the story, but his Los Angeles defense attorney wisely advised him to turn it down, as it could impact the case.

The film, entitled, "The Bling Ring," is being touted as a docudrama, and starring Emma Watson of "Harry Potter" fame.

The detective said he did notify his supervisors within the police department of his work on the case.

Continue reading "Los Angeles Criminal Defense Impacted by "Movie Star" Detective" »

Those convicted of Los Angeles drug crimes - particularly those whose crimes involved crack cocaine - may have been sentenced under a law that Congress repealed in 2010 after deeming it unfair and racially biased.

Our Los Angeles drug crimes attorneys understand that potentially thousands of cases across the country could be affected, with retroactive sentencing applied.

According to The Los Angeles Times, a lawyer for the federal Justice Department has issued a request to Supreme Court justices, imploring them to instruct sentencing judges to use the new law - not the old one - when determining prison sentences for people convicted of offenses involving crack cocaine - particularly those whose crimes were committed prior to the passage of the law, but whose sentences were not yet handed down.

Under the old federal law, anyone who was convicted for selling even a smaller amount of cocaine, defined as 50 grams (which is less than 2 ounces) were facing a mandatory 10 years in federal prison. But then in 2010, Congress approved the Fair Sentencing Act. This increased that threshold to 280 grams, instead of 50. President Obama signed off on it in the summer of 2010.

This was a major victory for Los Angeles criminal defense attorneys, who had long believed that stiff penalties in these cases unfairly targeted racial minorities.

The only problem with the measure was that it didn't clearly say whether it would be applicable to those who were sentenced after August 2010, even if their alleged crimes were committed two or three years prior.

The Supreme Court Justices debated the issue for about an hour, but as of yet, haven't handed down a decision.

So for example, in one case, a man is accused of selling 5 grams of crack in Illinois in 2008. He admitted to this crime. However, he was not sentenced until September 2010. This was a month after the president had approved the law, and yet, the judge applied the old sentencing law, sending him to prison for 10 years.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor said the decision would be tough because while trial judges are typically bound to guidelines that say new laws can't be applied to old crimes. But on the other hand, the law governing crack cocaine sentences was deemed discriminatory.

While it's not clear exactly how many people this could affect, we do know that on average, about 5,000 people are sentenced for crack convictions in federal court every single year.

It's important to note that not everyone who has been convicted of a crime involving crack cocaine is going to be eligible for retroactive sentencing under the new law, even if the justices grant the request of the Justice Department attorney.

If you think it's possible you may fall under this category, it's going to be important for you to contact an experienced Los Angeles criminal appeals attorney who can help you navigate the process.

Continue reading "Los Angeles Crack Dealers Could be Granted Lesser Sentences Retroactively" »

Los Angeles criminal appeals attorneys are closely watching the developments related to the November ballot initiative aimed at eliminating the death penalty in California capital cases.

If it's passed, those who are in the process of a Los Angeles criminal appeal will not have to contend with the possibility of death by lethal injection as a potential outcome to their case.

That would mean the most severe punishment a person could face under California law would be life in prison without the possibility of parole. This would make the state the 18th to abolish the death penalty. It's been a major movement just in the last five years, with four other states having already passed similar measures, and Connecticut is not far behind.

In the past, this is an issue that was seen with positions taken along partisan lines. Those in the more liberal base saw the death penalty as a moral issue, while conservatives viewed it as a tough-on-crime deterrent.

Now, however, conservatives are beginning to see these cases more in terms of cost. Not only are death penalty cases rare, they are costly and time-consuming - calling into question their effectiveness as a deterrent. According to The Los Angeles Times, the state has put to death 13 prisoners over the course of 23 years. Prisoners on death row are more likely to die of natural causes than by execution.

A recent study by a law professor and judge found that California's death penalty cases come with a price tag of nearly $185 million MORE than a sentence of life without parole. In fact, 13 executions cost the state $4 billion, which was attributed to legal expenses related to longer trials and appeals, and housing.

More than 700 people are currently on death row in the state. If the November ballot initiative is passed, all of their sentences would be commuted to life without parole. Those inmates would also be returned back to the general prison population, where they would be required to work. Any earnings derived from that work would be funneled to victims of crime.

The movement is getting some unexpected allies, including the a man who successfully campaigned for the death penalty approval in 1978, the former prosecutor who wrote that law, the former warden of San Quentin State Prison and a former district attorney for L.A. County. The former district attorney was quoted as saying that his time in that post shifted his views with regard to the fairness of the process. He said where a person was tried in the state had a significant impact on whether a person was condemned to die, due to the differing opinions of jurors on the issue. He said not only is the cost absurd, but a number of death row inmates in other states have been exonerated - some postmortem.

Executions haven't happened in the state for the last six years, following a judge's decision that the three-drug cocktail used in death penalty cases could cause extreme pain for the prisoner, meaning it amounted to cruel and unusual punishment under the U.S. Constitution.

The state's guidelines on executions are found in California Penal Code Section 3600 to 3607.

Continue reading "Los Angeles Criminal Appeals to be Impacted by November Death Penalty Vote" »

Bad news for those accused of a crime in Los Angeles: you may be subject to a strip search, no matter how petty your alleged crime.

That's the latest handed down from the U.S. Supreme Court.

Our Los Angeles criminal defense attorneys are disheartened at this decision. However, it's important to note that just because corrections officers have the right to strip-search you doesn't mean they have the right to grope, assault or otherwise harass you.

The 5-4 majority in this case decided that it would not be plausible for jail guards to weed out who might be dangerous and who wouldn't be. The court determined that the need to locate drugs or weapons outweighs an individual's right to privacy.

This means that if you are brought in for something as minor as a traffic offense, you may be subject to strip search.

In fact, this is exactly what happened to the New Jersey man whose case was heard before the court. The case is called Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of County of Burlington.

A finance director for a car dealership, the defendant (later plaintiff) was driving with his wife and children in his new vehicle when he was pulled over by a state trooper. He was arrested and taken to jail, where he was held in two facilities over the course of six days, over an unpaid fine. (As it later turned out, that, too had been a mistake and he had, in fact, paid that fine.) During the course of his incarceration, he was strip-searched twice.

He subsequently sued for violation of privacy and humiliation.

The court's ruling dealt with the issue of strip-searches in jail, rather than the specific issues of this case and whether law enforcement acted properly.

The lone dissenting justice, Stephen Breyer, argued that it was unreasonable to put potentially innocent people through the humiliation of a strip search. He even went so far as to say that such searches amount to a "serious" violation of privacy and dignity as human beings, and that they shouldn't be employed except in the most extreme of circumstances.

But the majority argued that the safety of workers and other inmates was paramount - even to the detriment of the civil rights of a single individual.

In fact, at least 10 states, including California, limit the use of strip searches. California Penal Code 4030 indicates that those arrested on misdemeanor infractions shouldn't be subjected to a cavity search. However, because federal law supersedes state law, it's still possible jail guards could argue their strip search actions justified - and be backed by federal law - even in misdemeanor cases.

Advocates with the American Civil Liberties Union have decried the decision, saying that it's going to directly infringe upon the privacy rights of millions across the country - even when they may only be jailed for a few hours, and before they have ever been convicted of any Los Angeles crime.

Continue reading "Los Angeles Criminal Defense Watch: Strip Searches" »

The Playboy Playmate of the Year for 2011 who allegedly was assaulted by Hugh Hefner's oldest son has taken out a Los Angeles restraining order against him, The Huffington Post reports.

The Huffington Post is also reporting that the woman wants to drop charges against the man if he apologizes, but the police are saying they don't need her help to press charges against him. That is true, but her lack of cooperation could make the case more difficult.

Los Angeles criminal defense lawyers understand that domestic violence in California is not an issue to be taken lightly. It can lead to serious problems, major criminal charges as well as injuries and problems at home.

At the same time, domestic violence incidents are sometimes brought on by jealousy and a desire to get someone in trouble with the law as a form of revenge. Officers who respond to a house may have to make a judgment based on weak evidence and often it leads to an arrest.

Even though charges are sometimes brought without evidence to back them up, the defendant must still face these allegations and deal with the potential backlash. That includes public embarrassment, possible job loss and the problem of now facing jail time.

While restraining orders may be helpful to some victims to try to ensure a person is kept away, they are easy to get. A temporary restraining order simply requires a person to stand in line at the courthouse and fill out paperwork to put the order in place. The defendant has no say in the matter.

They will get notice and will have to then prepare to defend themselves at a hearing, where they may need an experienced Los Angeles criminal defense lawyer to make sure their side of the story is told. A permanent order can kick a person out of their own home, keep them from their children and cause other problems.

In this case, according to The Huffington Post, the 20-year-old Playboy Playmate was allegedly attacked by the 21-year-old Hefner. Sources said that the woman was punched and kicked, leaving the woman with red marks. The suspect is being held on $20,000 bond.

When the state attempts to go forward with charges against the defendant in a domestic violence case, having the alleged victim is important. Although it's possible an alleged victim's testimony can be disproved by an experienced Los Angeles criminal defense lawyer, having them testify is key for prosecutors.

If the alleged victim refuses to cooperate with authorities, that leaves the state in the position of having an officer be the sole witness. They may have written a police report and may have taken some photos, but they weren't there. They didn't see what happened. They may be able to testify to the after-effects, but not the events that led to the injuries.

Therefore, it leaves a major gap in the state's case. And while restraining orders may be helpful, it could take special circumstances to introduce that as evidence in a trial. That is a separate civil matter unaffected by the criminal case.

Continue reading "Alleged Playboy Assault Leads to Los Angeles Restraining Order" »

In a strange case, Los Angeles manslaughter charges have been filed against a homeowner after the ceiling collapsed during a fire, killing a Los Angeles firefighter, the Los Angeles Times is reporting.

The case is bizarre because we all recognize that firefighters have a dangerous job. They must respond to houses where dangerous people be lingering in order to administer medical aid. They are asked to help victims of car accidents on busy highways and freeways, where errant drivers can pose a threat. And, most commonly, they are asked to enter burning buildings to help people and save property.

Yet, in this case, the man who designed and built the house is now being charged with involuntary manslaughter because the ceiling fell in, killing a responding firefighter and injuring five others.

Our Los Angeles criminal defense attorneys understand there is pressure from families and often the public for criminal charges to be filed. But in a situation like this, maybe an accident is simply an accident.

The state must ask whether this sets a bad precedent for other cases in the future if a firefighter dies in the line of duty. Will all builders be liable for unplanned fires that cause structural damage?

In California, involuntary manslaughter is punishable by two, three or four years in prison, according to California Penal Code 193. Some may think of that as a cakewalk for a case where a person died, but you have to think that this is also going to subject a person to hardened criminals and life without freedom.

In this case, firefighters responded to a house fire last January. They fought the blaze as it crept along the attic. Investigators believe it started in the fireplace and spread up the walls and eventually into the ceiling.

Fire investigators found that the house did have a sprinkler system, but that the piping was made of plastic and it melted from exposure to the flames. As the water dumped out, it filled the insulation, which made it heavy.

So, as firefighters were battling the flames, the pressure from the soaked insulation began causing problems with the structure of the house, causing the ceiling to cave in, killing the firefighter.

The Times piece also states that the architect included in his house an 18-foot "fire trough," described as an oversized indoor fire pit, inside the house. Authorities say he was warned about the potential dangers.

So now there may be two tragedies. A brave firefighter doing his job was killed protecting society. At the same time, a homeowner -- who happened to design his own home -- is now facing a major felony charge that could ruin his life as he knows it. Where's the justice in that?

In every case -- manslaughter or not -- criminal defendants require strong legal representation. This is to ensure the case is proven beyond all reasonable doubt, if that's even possible.

Continue reading "Los Angeles Manslaughter Charges Brought in Firefighter's Death" »

A recent court case in Georgia shows that Los Angeles criminal appeals, especially in murder cases, are extremely important.

What happened is this: A defendant was put on trial for murder in the death of a 15-month-old girl. Subsequently, a judge was found by an appeals court to have made inappropriate comments during the course of the trial. This led to a new trial.

Los Angeles criminal appeals lawyers know that a defense attorney is looking out for as many things as possible during trial. They are watching their wording, trying to ensure they ask all the right questions and making objections to important issues. All of these decisions must be made quickly, on the spot.

Sometimes, inappropriate comments made by witnesses, other attorneys or even judges can slip by. While criminal appeals attorneys have the pressure of knowing they may be the last line of defense for someone who has been convicted, the appeals attorneys also have the benefit of poring over the transcripts of every hearing and proceeding to find holes in the state's case.

In the case of Murphy v. State, the defendant was charged with several counts related to the death of a 15-month-old baby. Court documents indicate the man was babysitting the girl, who was the daughter of his girlfriend, on the night in question.

Around midnight, a few hours after his girlfriend returned home from work, the girl was unresponsive. He performed CPR while the girlfriend called emergency responders, who were unable to bring the girl back to life. She was pronounced dead. The cause of death was later determined to be toxic shock, after several internal organs ruptured due to blunt force trauma.

At trial, the man faced charges of malice murder, felony murder and cruelty to children. He was convicted and sentenced to life in prison.

On appeal, the Georgia Supreme Court considered whether comments made by the judge in the case had affected the outcome.

In one scenario, when a police detective was on the stand, the judge called him a "good detective," and responded to an objection by defense counsel by stating that the detective had a good recollection and excellent written reports on the case and "hopefully, between the two of those and his good efforts we're going to find the truth of the matter."

These inappropriate comments were made in front of the jury, who could easily have been influenced by these words. Jurors should judge the credibility of a witness based on the witnesses' words, their demeanor and relationship to the case. A judge, who holds a lot of pull with jurors, shouldn't say things that would make jurors think more highly of one witness than another.

An experienced criminal appeals lawyer spotted this problem, saw the trend and was able to use it to help the defendant get justice. In this case, the defendant was able to get a new trial, though it took 12 years for the court to come to this conclusion. While this process takes time, it's a better alternative than appeals being rushed and something being missed.

Continue reading "Murphy v. State Shows Importance of Los Angeles Murder Appeals" »

The Los Angeles Times recently reported that a sheriff's official was arrested after highway patrol officers allegedly found her slumped over the wheel of her county car.

The news came as Los Angeles Police Department officers put considerable resources into looking for drunk drivers around the Super Bowl. These two stories not only show that law enforcement is continuing to put more and more money and time into DUI efforts, but it also shows that anyone can be charged with this crime, without premeditation.

Los Angeles DUI defense lawyers have seen many people charged with DUI, and understand how a conviction can ruin their lives. It can cause marital and career problems and that's on top of the criminal penalties. DUI in Los Angeles is considered a misdemeanor, but the consequences can be costly.

According to the Times, police received several 911 calls one recent evening after drivers reported a vehicle was stopped in the middle of a freeway in Pasadena. When CHP officers got to the scene, they found a woman, identified as the sheriff's office's civilian director, driving the vehicle.

They reported her car was in drive, but her head was resting on the wheel and her foot was on the brake. Police believe she was intoxicated. Her blood alcohol level reportedly measured .20, which is more than two times the state's legal limit.

The woman is in charge of a community partnership program and has a previous arrest for DUI from 2009. She had been allowed to keep her job after that conviction, though she was placed on probation. Officials with the sheriff's office said she was placed on leave after this most recent arrest.

According to NBC News, Los Angeles police had posted extra patrols during Super Bowl weekend, trying to boost DUI arrests. Officers were set up at Hubbard Street and Foothill Boulevard checking drivers.

Other local agencies also chipped in to conduct investigations throughout Southern California. Officers said they were there to try to make sure Super Bowl party patrons weren't leaving drunk. While officers set up checkpoints, they also used an increase in patrols to try to spot drunken drivers.

These efforts go to show that DUI is a charge that law enforcement still takes very seriously. While it is most often considered a minor charge by the courts, police continually spend countless hours and taxpayer dollars trying to make as many arrests as possible.

Even though law enforcement will admit DUI checkpoints and other measures are largely geared toward being public relations campaigns than anything else, they are costly and time-consuming for these departments. Despite those factors, they continue to do them.

Even a first-time DUI offense in Los Angeles can lead to time in jail, fines, a driver's license suspension, education classes and even an ignition interlock device being placed on the vehicle.

These are major penalties that an everyday person can end up being forced to deal with. And even though this is a crime any person can face -- without premeditation or ill will -- the penalties don't change based on the defendant. Anyone can be stuck dealing with this if they have one drink too many.

A defendant should hire an experienced Los Angeles DUI defense attorney who will explore all defenses, look at all of the state's evidence and help ensure the defendant gets a fair trial.

Continue reading "Los Angeles DUI Charge Something That Anyone Can Face" »