California Criminal Lawyers Blog

A recent item from the Daily Pilot interested us greatly as Orange drug possession criminal defense attorneys, because it showed how police misconduct can shatter a case. According to the March 3 article, a Superior Court judge dismissed all charges this week against Brian David Heslington, 37, because the police had misrepresented the documents that supported a search warrant against him. As a result of that warrant, police found a controlled substance and a firearm at Heslington's home, leading to possession charges for both. The judge said the police officer responsible for the mistake had submitted "false or restless testimony" in support of the search warrant.

Heslington originally came to law enforcement's attention because of his involvement in a bar fight in Newport Beach, in which he and other Hell's Angels fought with another biker gang. More than a week later, on Aug. 6, 2008, the Newport Beach police searched Heslington's home. It wasn't clear what controlled substance was found or why the firearm was not legal. However, the charges were thrown out because of mistakes by Newport Beach officer Christine O'Donnell. She reportedly submitted uncertified documents when certified ones were called for, and submitted a photocopied court seal instead of an authentic one. Perhaps more importantly to the judge, she failed to clarify this in two separate court hearings. The judge's opinion said this made it possible that the search warrant was granted based on false statements.

This doesn't happen in every case our Fontana drug possession defense lawyers handle -- but when it does, it can weaken the case so badly that it must be thrown out. Search warrants must be based on court orders because they are an exception to our Fourth Amendment right to be free of unreasonable searches. Those court orders require judges to weigh the evidence carefully -- which they cannot do if they are given false or misleading statements. That is, lies and sloppy work from police undermine the protections in our justice system against police overreaching. And, as in this case, that means that the evidence from the search may be hopelessly tainted and must be thrown out. Without evidence, prosecutors generally don't have a case and must drop the charges entirely.

HOWARD | NASSIRI PC represents clients who are facing all types of drug charges, from simple possession to sales and trafficking. As with this case, many drug cases are built around a search, sometimes multiple searches or surveillance. And as with this case, those searches must be legal in order to hold up in court. Searches may be irrevocably tainted by tainted warrants; a lack of any warrant; traffic stops without reasonable probable cause or other violations. Our Buena Park drug possession criminal defense lawyers look carefully through each new drug case we take to find these and other violations of our clients' legal rights. These can form the basis of a strong defense, or sometimes allow us to negotiate for reduced charges with lighter, more reasonable penalties.

If you're charged with any kind of drug crime in California, don't assume you're guilty just because the police said you were. To discuss your options at a free, confidential consultation, please call HOWARD | NASSIRI at 1-800-872-5925 or contact us through the Internet today.

The states of Illinois and New York have passed laws barring registered sex offenders from using social networking sites, sparking an outcry from civil libertarians. So our Los Angeles sex crimes defense attorneys were disappointed to see that the state of California is considering following suit, according to a March 2 article from the San Francisco Chronicle. The bill introduced last month by Assemblywoman Norma Torres makes it a crime for registered sex offenders to use any social networking site. It was sponsored by San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris, who is running for state Attorney General. A similar bill from Santa Clara's state Sen. George Runner was introduced in the state Senate.

The bill from Torres defines a social networking site as any site that allows users to build networks or connect with other people, and that "provides means for users to connect over the Internet." It's not clear how people who break the law would be penalized. In fact, the article noted that the law relies to some extent on sex offenders to remove themselves from the sites out of fear of prosecution. An attorney for Facebook and another attorney general candidate, Chris Kelly, noted that it's hard for social networking sites to track down offenders without a requirement like New York's, which goes further than the proposed legislation by requiring sex offenders to provide their email addresses and online handles. Torres cited the recent case of a 12-year-old girl who was sexually assaulted by a 33-year-old man she met on MySpace.

We absolutely agree that winning the trust of young Internet users and then raping them is illegal and unacceptable and should be punished. However, as Fallbrook sex crimes criminal defense lawyers, we don't believe this proposed law would be either effective or constitutional if passed. The law relies mainly on sex offenders to self-police, which is generally not successful in any area of criminal law. (There are also statistics showing that this is a solution looking for a problem; only a tiny fraction of child sexual assaults are by people the victim met online.) Perhaps more importantly, this law may be unconstitutional, because it unreasonably restricts individuals' rights without a rational goal or evidence of another crime. Former sex offenders may not be popular, but the Bill of Rights still applies to them. And a restriction on using the Internet, especially if interpreted broadly, could hurt the ex-offenders' efforts to get jobs and live law-abiding lives.

Continue reading "California Legislature Considers Ban on Sex Offenders in Social Networking Sites" »

As Long Beach medical marijuana criminal defense attorneys, we were extremely disappointed to see that Los Angeles County prosecutors are aggressively pursuing charges against legally operating dispensaries. As the Associated Press reported Feb. 18, the owner of a medical marijuana dispensary in West Los Angeles is charged with no fewer than 24 felonies, including possessing, transporting and distributing marijuana. All of the charges against Jeff Joseph, operator of Organica, stem from alleged violations of state law. State law recognizes a difference between medical marijuana and recreational drug use; federal law does not. Joseph pleaded not guilty, but his bail was set at $520,000.

According to the article, Joseph's charges are the result of an "intensive" investigation by state and federal officers, including undercover purchases by FBI agents. Joseph and other operators of medical marijuana dispensaries are also facing civil lawsuits filed by Los Angeles City Attorney Carmen Trutanich. Both the city and the county allege that the practice of selling marijuana over the counter is illegal even though possessing and using it is legal, which the medical marijuana community vigorously disputes. The courts have not yet ruled on this. The prosecutors also allege that the dispensaries are making a profit in violation of the Attorney General's guidelines, which say dispensaries should not be for profit. Joseph's Los Angeles medical marijuana defense lawyer said prosecutors had singled him out as a scapegoat for political reasons.

This criminal case could be very important, because it may give courts their first opportunity to rule on whether Cooley and Trutanich are right about over-the-counter marijuana sales. That's important to our Irvine medical marijuana criminal defense lawyers, because any court ruling could affect businesses all over Southern California and the state. We suspect that Joseph's attorney is correct that the prosecutions are politically motivated. However, there is ample evidence that over-the-counter sales are legal, including the fact that dispensaries must get a seller's permit and collect sales tax for the state Board of Equalization. The Attorney General's guidelines allow collectives and cooperatives to reasonably compensate their workers. And then there's the common-sense question of how patients can legally possess and use marijuana without a legal way to purchase it.

Continue reading "Medical Marijuana Dispensary Operator Charged With 24 Felonies in Los Angeles" »

As Fullerton drunk driving criminal defense lawyers, we already have a problem with the concept of DUI checkpoints. Also called sobriety roadblocks, these are the areas where police stop every car and check each driver for signs of intoxication, regardless of whether they have a reasonable suspicion. The Supreme Court has ruled that they are legal, but we believe they invite too many opportunities for abuses by officers. Unfortunately, a Feb. 14 blog post from the OC Register shows that this concern is well-founded. The Center for Investigative Reporting at UC Berkeley's California Watch publication reported Feb. 13 that sobriety checkpoints across California have become cash cows for cities, allowing law enforcement to seize vehicles from unlicensed drivers, usually minorities and often illegal immigrants.

A 2005 ruling from the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals made it illegal for officers to impound vehicles just because the driver is not licensed. Nonetheless, the report says vehicle seizures actually went up by 53% between 2007 and 2009. In fact, the investigation found that the total number of seized cars in 2009 was about seven times larger than the total number of arrests for drunk driving -- the ostensible point of a sobriety roadblock. The impound fees allow cash-strapped municipalities to raise money from fines and split towing fees with towing companies. It also allows police officers to earn overtime from federal grant money, which may be the reason why some roadblocks had up to three times as many officers as necessary. And according to the article, the checkpoints are substantially more common in Hispanic areas, suggesting that authorities are targeting communities they think are full of unlicensed illegal immigrants.

A great deal of the attention paid to this report online focuses on the fact that many drivers who are not licensed are not in this country legally. But as South Gate DUI criminal defense attorneys, we'd like to discuss the constitutional problems and potential for abuse with sobriety checkpoints. Checkpoints were challenged long ago in the Supreme Court for violating the Fourth Amendment right to be free of illegal search and seizure. The court acknowledged that the practice is unconstitutional -- but it ruled that it was legal anyway, saying the state's interest in stopping drunk driving outweighed the Fourth Amendment. As a result, we cannot challenge any arrest from a sobriety checkpoint in California, although we can and do challenge arrests from checkpoints that violate legal guidelines. Thanks to this article, we will also be on the look for "sobriety checkpoints" that are abusive in other ways.

Continue reading "Investigative Report Finds Sober Drivers' Cars Routinely Impounded at Sobriety Checkpoints" »

As Chino Hills DUI criminal defense attorneys, we were interested to see an article about a suspected DUI case that didn't end with a criminal charge. The Orange County Register reported Feb. 22 that Thomas Reed, 23, of Canyon Lake is accused of causing an accident involving an off-duty Los Angeles County sheriff's deputy and the principal of Marina High School in Huntington Beach. Reed is accused of rear-ending a car driven by Jonathan Kerber, 23, on the 91 Freeway near Imperial Highway. Debris from the accident hit a car driven by Paul Morrow, principal of Marina High.

Law enforcement said Reed was driving at about 100 mph when he rear-ended a car driven by Kerber. Also in the car was Kerber's wife Mallory Kerber, 27. Jonathan Kerber saw Reed's vehicle coming and veered to the right, off the road. Reed veered to the left and hit the center divider. Debris from that impact hit a car driven by Morrow, and occupied by passenger Jeanne Ellis, an assistant principal at the school. Ellis sustained multiple broken bones and Morrow sustained a concussion. Both Kerbers sustained minor injuries, but Jonathan Kerber was alert enough to chase Reed and stopped his attempt to flee the scene. The Orange County District Attorney's office said there was insufficient evidence to charge Reed, but that may change if more evidence comes to light.

To some people, it may seem like an injustice that the DA's office didn't charge Reed. But as Westminster drunk driving defense attorneys, we know that prosecutors won't bring charges if they don't believe they can win at trial. That suggests that in this case, they don't have they key piece of evidence in most DUI cases -- a breath, blood or urine test. Without a blood-alcohol concentration test result, you can still be charged with DUI in California, but only if prosecutors believe they can prove you were under the influence of alcohol, drugs or both. This can be difficult to prove without a BAC test result, because evidence for it is usually circumstantial. However, Reed may still face a DMV license suspension if he refused to take a test.

Continue reading "Prosecutors Decline to Charge Alleged Drunk Driver Who Hit Off-Duty Officer" »

A recent piece of news from the celebrity press caught the eyes of our Los Angeles County battery criminal defense lawyers. According to a Feb. 20 article from the Los Angeles Times, actor Sean Penn has been charged with two misdemeanors that stem from a run-in he had Oct. 12 with a photographer. The incident was captured on video by another photographer and broadcast on TV and the Internet by celebrity gossip site TMZ. If convicted of misdemeanor battery and misdemeanor vandalism, Penn, the award-winning star of "Milk" and "Mystic River," faces up to 18 months in jail. He will be arraigned March 22.

Video of the incident is widely available online:

The video clearly shows Penn approaching the photographer and kicking at him, while yelling "Get out!" As the incident wore on, the paparazzo retreated and the person operating the video camera got into his or her car, obscuring the view of the remainder of the incident. However, the photographer's attorney now claims he was badly hurt enough to require surgery. The charges from the Los Angeles County District Attorney's office are battery and vandalism, which means Penn is being accused of physically touching the paparazzo, and with damaging his camera. Penn has a history of bad relations with the paparazzi, having been criminally charged twice in the eighties for attacking strangers who tried to photograph him. He also received a suspended sentence for punching someone at a nightclub who he thought had kissed his then-wife, Madonna.

Judging by the video and the facts in the article, our Newport Beach battery criminal defense lawyers think Penn has a good chance of defending himself. The video certainly shows that Penn approached the paparazzo and yelled at him, but it never clearly shows a punch or a kick connecting. This is important when the charge is battery, because battery is the crime of force or unwanted touching -- not just threats. The video may show damage to the camera, when Penn forces the photographer to back into a car, but again, the video is not as clear as prosecutors might want. The previous convictions in the article are more than 20 years old by now. And of course, jurors may sympathize with Penn, who has repeatedly criticized the paparazzi and their routine invasions of targets' privacy.

Continue reading "Sean Penn Charged With Battery and Vandalism for Attacking Paparazzo" »

As Anaheim vandalism criminal defense attorneys, we know cities and counties spend a lot of money repainting buildings that have been targeted by graffiti. So we weren't surprised when we read in the OC Weekly Feb. 18 that the city of Garden Grove is planning an aggressive fight against graffiti. However, the method the city has chosen is raising eyebrows: It plans to fine citizens $1,000 if they are caught carrying tools for making graffiti. The plan has raised an outcry from at least some civil libertarians, who say it criminalizes legal behavior and allows police to selectively choose who they believe is a "criminal."

The city's ban would include spray paint as well as any other tools of graffiti. If the defendant is under 18, the fine applies to his or her parents. This fine would actually be an "administrative citation" -- that is, a really expensive ticket. Garden Grove has had some success issuing administrative citations for other minor crimes, most notably illegal fireworks. The city says this solves the problem without clogging the courts or jails, and in the case of graffiti, will lower maintenance costs. City Manager Matt Fertal said the city wouldn't go after law-abiding citizens who happen to have spray paint, but would target only people who had already broken the law.

As Carson vandalism defense lawyers, we don't believe this idea will hold up if it's challenged in court. A city ordinance that criminalizes lawful behavior violates the civil rights of everyone in that city. Allowing police officers to use their discretion only makes matters worse, because it essentially makes police into the final authority. It's not hard to imagine that officers might apply the fine selectively, perhaps to people who said something rude to them, or people whose behavior, clothes or racial background they don't happen to like. And taking these cases out of courts might save money, but it does so at the expense of due process. In essence, the city has made it possible to be fined for graffiti without actually having painted graffiti, with no way to challenge the case before a judge or jury.

Continue reading "City of Garden Grove Plans to Fine 'Taggers' for Merely Carrying Spray Paint" »

As Santa Ana sex crimes defense attorneys, we were surprised and pleased by a recent statement by the California state Sex Offender Management Board. The Contra Costa Times reported Feb. 16 that the board recommends major changes to Jessica's Law and other laws restricting the rights of sex offenders after release from prison. Board members said these laws force sex offenders into homelessness and cost a lot of money but don't seem to make citizens any safer. They also apologized for the agency's failure to find Philip Garrido, the convicted rapist who kidnapped 11-year-old Jaycee Dugard in 1991 and held her captive in Northern California for 18 years.

Jessica's Law bans convicted sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of a school or another place where children gather regularly. Matthew Cate, the state's secretary of corrections and rehabilitation, said the law makes it nearly impossible to find legal housing in some areas. As a result, the number of homeless sex offenders has skyrocketed, from fewer than 100 before the law took effect to thousands today. Studies have shown that the instability of homelessness can actually increase the risk of re-offending. The agency recommended applying Jessica's Law only to the most serious offenders; routinely requiring treatment for sex offender parolees; taking low-risk offenders off the list after a set period; and combining GPS anklets with community supervision.

The article notes that politicians see a risk of being labeled "soft on crime" if they back a repeal of Jessica's Law. Our Long Beach sex crimes criminal defense lawyers agree that this is a risk, but we think that's a real shame. As the board members explained, residency restrictions for sex offenders can actually increase the risk of another crime by making it hard to find a home, a job and other basic tools of living a law-abiding life. Meanwhile, the rules strain the state budget, creating thousands of new parolees and expensive programs at a time when we can't afford to support failed programs. And while the board didn't make this argument, we believe sex offender registration laws violate the spirit of the law by imposing extra penalties on people who've already done their time. Even former murder convicts don't face the same legal restrictions and social stigma.

Continue reading "State Board Admits Sex Offender Restrictions Are Ineffective and Expensive" »