If you have been arrested and convicted of a criminal offense in California and your sentence requires you to serve a term of incarceration you may be interested to know if you qualify for house arrest. Only an experienced California criminal defense attorney can evaluate your unique situation; however, some ...The post Can You Get House Arrest in California? appeared first on Law Office of Domenic J. Lombardo.
Can You Get House Arrest in California?
↧
↧
NY - Raped behind bars - New York prisons have a problem: "A fox guarding the hen house"
Original Article
09/09/2013
By Alysia Santo
Anna cowered in a prison hallway, her inmate jumpsuit ripped, her neck bruised. Afraid to speak the unspeakable truth, she told the sergeant who found her that she was upset about issues with her kids.
When questioned later, she said Donald Lasker, a guard at Albion State Prison in Orleans County, had just raped her and threatened to harm her if she told.
Lasker was eventually convicted of statutory rape. His sentence: 10 weekends in...
[[ This is a content summary only. Visit our blog for full links, videos, studies and more! ]]
↧
North Carolina Court decides whether a Firefighter can pull someone over for DUI
I recently saw an article discussing a case in North Carolina. Since I found it interesting, and I had a similar about 7 years ago I thought I would discuss it here on the blog. It asks two questions whether a firefighter can stop and detain someone for a DUI and whether by doing so are they acting as a state agent which would subject them to 4th amendment restrictions.
Basically in North
↧
Man Arrested On Fugitive Warrant with New Burglary and Firearm Charges
Twenty-two-year-old Steven Ryan Ritchie of Bonaire, Ga., is facing charges of armed burglary, grand theft of a firearm and grand theft stemming from the burglary of a home in Santa Rosa Beach. Ritchie also faces fugitive warrant charges from the Cherokee County, Ga., Sheriff's Office for vehicle theft charges, aggravated battery on a law enforcement officer, leaving a scene of an accident with injuries, resisting arrest with violence and grand theft auto after he drove a stolen 1999 Jeep Wrangler into a deputy’s patrol car at a gas station.
Many individuals, after having committed a criminal offense, leave the jurisdiction of the court where such crime has taken place, thinking that because they are in another state, that they are free, or the accused hides within the jurisdiction to escape prosecution. In either case, this action makes the individual a fugitive. A fugitive from justice who flees from one state to another may be subjected to extradition in the state to which he or she has fled. A person convicted or accused of a crime who hides from law enforcement in the state or flees across state lines to avoid arrest or punishment will be hunted many times by one of many law enforcement agencies who learn of the accused’s outstanding warrant from Florida.
Police from other states are obligated to detain or hold the accused in custody for the benefit of the court system of the state the warrant originated. This power is codified in the Uniform Criminal Extradition Act (UCEA) which was passed in 1941, as well as the Uniform Extradition and Rendition Act, which require a governor who receives a valid request for extradition to issue a warrant for the arrest and extradition of the fugitive. This authority originates from Article Four, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, which directs every state to cooperate in the extradition of an individual “on demand” from another state.
Florida Statute 941 sets forth the “Uniform Extradition Act of Florida.” This act sets out the duties of the governor of each state to cooperate in the apprehension and transport of fugitives from justice. The governor can delegate the task of signing of the warrant, which is many times signed by an administrative officer or judge. An extradition warrant authorizes a law enforcement officer or a person to whom it is directed to arrest the fugitive at any time, any place where they may be found. An arrested fugitive is to be brought before a judge before transferring custody of them to an agent of the demanding state.
The effect of extradition warrants on crime is a decreased number of fugitives running from police. Unfortunately, many either are not aware of their fugitive status, or are not aware of the consequences of their movement out of the state, whether for fleeing from the court or just mere travel. What an accused should know is that there is typically no permanent escape from arrest, even if the accused runs to the next state or country.
Fugitive warrants are not only issued for serious crimes, but often for misdemeanor offenses, and carry far greater consequences than the accused previously faced, once filed.
Misdemeanors and felonies that are not considered capital crimes generally have a statute of limitations, a period of time after which a crime cannot be prosecuted if the person has not been charged. For example, a ten-year statute of limitation on tax debt means that a person cannot be charged with tax evasion more than ten years after their occurrence. Warrants, however, do not have a statute of limitations, so once a fugitive warrant has been issued, the limitation for the particular offense is suspended because the judicial system has met its requirement with the filing of charges.
There are currently 60 inter-agency fugitive task forces located throughout the United States, including seven congressionally funded regional fugitive task forces. These task forces, staffed by federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies, target the most dangerous fugitives. Through these fugitive task forces, communities are allegedly protected from criminals, and the rights of the accused are protected through the process of extradition.
While awaiting extradition, the accused will be required to sit in jail. However, an experienced Jacksonville warrants/extradition defense attorney can petition the court to temporarily withdraw the warrant so that one can be released from jail in the other state, and then voluntarily drive oneself to Florida to surrender directly to the court to resolve the case.
If one does nothing, one may be arrested when one least expects it, as a police officer will arrest one if he or she discovers the Jacksonville Arrest Warrant. If one is in a similar situation, one should obtain an experienced attorney to have the warrant or capias recalled and if the warrant is invalid, be able to show that warrant’s invalidity.
↧
FL AG Requests Delay in Execution to Attend Fundraiser
Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi requested an execution be continued to accommodate her re-election campaign. She was scheduled to attend a fundraiser kicking off her re-election campaign. Gov. Scott accommodated her request, not knowing the...
[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]
↧
↧
Rape Conviction Vacated in Illinois
Nearly a decade after a homeless Illinois man was convicted of a 2002 rape, Cook County State's Attorney Anita Alvarez will vacate the conviction today. Carl Chatman was accused of raping a city employee in her office. Despite a lack of evidence linking Chatman to the crime, he was quickly found guilty and in 2004 was sentenced to 30 years behind bars. The case rested on the victim's identification and a false confession from Chatman, who has mental health issues. Chicago Sun-Times columnist Mary Mitchell reports that it took a jury just half an hour to convict Chatman and the criminal justice system more than a decade to realize his innocence.
" 'In reviewing the information and evidence in this case, there is not enough sound evidence to uphold the conviction,' " said a spokeswoman for Alvarez's office on Monday afternoon.
The dismissal of Chatman's case came as the result of an in-depth reinvestigation by Alvarez's Conviction Integrity Unit. Chatman's attorneys have long argued that alleged victim's claim about being sexually assaulted by Chatman was untrue and that she was simply seeking monetary compensation. In 1979, the alleged victim had made a nearly identical claim-that she had been raped in an office building after business hours. The previous claim was made against a Polish immigrant who fled to Poland before he could be tried for the crime.
"In a Petition for Post-Conviction Relief filed in 2007, lawyers with the Office of the State Appellate Defender, as well as the civil rights law firm Loevy & Loevy argued that the rape victim had a 'pattern of alleging she was sexually assaulted then filing suits for monetary gain.' " ... "In both instances, the rape victim hired counsel immediately after making her allegations and filed lawsuits seeking monetary damages against the building owners, the building management companies, the building security providers and the janitorial services, according to the petition."
When Alvarez created the Conviction Integrity Unit last year, she promised to review cases, such as Chapman's, that involve confessions by defendants with mental-health issues.
" 'Oh my God,' cried Theresa Chatman, the convicted man's sister, before breaking down in sobs," when told about Alvarez's decision to dismiss the charges against her brother. " 'Do I need to bring him any clothes? What time will he get out because I'm going to show up in a limo,' she said."
Chatman, now 58, could be released from Dixon Correctional Center as early as today. Read the full article.
↧
DUI on a horse in Boulder, Colorado....well sort of.
The Washington Post reports that a man was arrested in beautiful Boulder, Colorado for riding under the influence, animal cruelty, and other charges. The rider apparently had a Pug in his backpack and some beer and a pistol in his saddlebag.
According to an article by Matt Farley of KDVR, "Witnesses Monday said the man hit the horse hard enough that it reared up on its hind legs." "Officers observed that the rider was slumped to his right side as he crossed streets and forced pedestrians off the sidewalk."
The Salt Lake Tribune, Matthew Piper, reports that the rider was arrested for suspicion of "animal cruelty, prohibited weapons use, riding a horse while under the influence of alcohol, and reckless endangerment."
The DUI laws in Colorado state that it is illegal for a person who is under the influence of alcohol or one or more drugs (or a combination) to drive a motor vehicle or vehicle. Obviously a horse is not a motor vehicle. However, is it a vehicle? The statutes read that a vehicle is a bicycle, an EPAMD, or an electrical assisted bicycle. The statutes also indicate that a vehicle is not a wheelchair, a snowmobile, a farm tractor, off highway vehicle, or an implement of husbandry designed primarily or exclusively for use is agricultural operations, or a device designed to move through the air or stationary rails or tracks.
Thus, the short answer is no. A horse is not a vehicle. There is no DUI case here. A bicycle can get you a DUI, but a horse can't.
There is however, a charge of animal rider on highway under the influence of alcohol/controlled substance. The penalty for this charge is a small fine only. It is a class B traffic infraction. The maximum penalty is $100.00 and no points on a driver's license. This charge is small potatoes. The other charges for the rider are of much more concern.
To prove the possession of a weapon while intoxicated charge, the prosecutor will have to show that the rider had in his possession a firearm while under the influence of an intoxicating liquor or a controlled substance. If found guilty, the charge is a Class 2 Misdemeanor that carries the possible penalty of 3 months to 12 months in jail.
To prove the reckless endangerment charge, the prosecutor will have to show that the rider engaged in conduct which creates a substantial risk of serious bodily injury to another person. This offense is a Class 3 Misdemeanor which carries a possible penalty of 6 months in jail.
In order to prove animal cruelty, the prosecutor will have to prove, in summary, that the rider knowingly, recklessly, or with criminal negligence overdrives, overloads, overworks, torments, deprives of necessary sustenance, unnecessarily or cruelly beats, allows to be housed in a manner that results in chronic or repeated serious physical harm, carries or confines in or upon any vehicles in a cruel or reckless manner, engages in a sexual act with an animal, or otherwise mistreats or neglects any animal, or causes or procures it to be done, or, having the charge or custody of any animal, fails to provide it with proper food, drink, or protection from the weather consistent with the species, breed, and type of animal involved, or abandons an animal. Cruelty to animals is a Class 1 Misdemeanor punishable by 6 months to 18 months in jail.
↧
Crash Blocking Westbound Milwaukee On-Ramp To Westbound I84
IDAHO STATE POLICE NEWS RELEASE - generated by our News Release ListServer
DO NOT REPLY
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IDAHO STATE POLICE NEWS RELEASE
District 3 Patrol 700 S. Stratford Dr., Meridian 83642
(208) 846-7550
Fax (208) 846-7520
For Immediate Release: 09/10/2013 6:25pm
Please direct questions to the District Office
Idaho State Police is investigating a motorcycle crash westbound I184 at the onramp to westbound I84.
At this time the westbound on-ramp from Milwaukee to continue westbound onto I84 is blocked. Ada County and Boise Police is on scene providing traffic control. Motorists should avoid the area if possible.
-------------
↧
Why Doesn’t Arizona Offer DUI Diversion Programs for First Offenders?
Prosecutor’s offices around the country are beginning to come around concept that first-time DUI offenders shouldn’t be saddled with a lifetime criminal conviction. That notion, in addition to the fiscal reality of bloated overtime budgets of police departments, has spawned DUI diversion programs. DUI diversion programs are offered because prosecutors and courts realize that sometimes a DUI is a mistake....read more →The post Why Doesn’t Arizona Offer DUI Diversion Programs for First Offenders? appeared first on Arizona Criminal Law & Defense Blog.
↧
↧
Possessing 18 Baggies of Weed Doesn't Equal an Intent to Sell Charge
There are plenty of bogus charges out there, and one of my favorites is Possession of a controlled substance with the intent to sell or deliver. In my twenty (plus) years of defending criminal cases in Orlando, I've seen plenty of cops, judges, and prosecutors that truly do not understand the law on intent charges. Like any other law, these charges have evolved and expanded as the arresting officer sees fit. Basically, a possession with intent charge is really just a simple possession charge that is upgraded due to the quantity of drugs, the packaging of the drugs, or the money found on the citizen. The charge packaged nicely with a bow on top once the arresting officer gives his "expert" opinion that such circumstances are consistent with drug dealing. So, let's take a look at a real life example, like we always do.
In Alleyne v. State, 42 So.3d 948 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010), the defendant was charged with possession of marijuana with intent to sell within 1,000 feet of a school. Alleyne ran when police rolled up to a convenience store, and as he ran a brown bag flew out of his hand. Inside the bag was 18 individual plastic Ziploc baggies containing marijuana, a rolled up $20 bill, with another $36 was found in Alleyne's pocket. The total weight of 18 baggies was less than 20 grams (a misdemeanor, fyi).
At trial, an officer testified that the "amount that Mr. Alleyne had on his person was not for personal use, it was for drug dealing." Id. The officer was convinced these 18 baggies of marijuana could not have been for personal use, "[n]ot the way it was packaged, not the way he was standing, and not the way the incident took place." Id.at 949. Now, for those of you who have not participated in many drug trials, let me tell you, testimony from a cop that the drugs were 'packaged consistent with drug dealing' never makes much sense, because there's always two sides to a transaction. My kitchen is full of stuff that is packaged for sale. My unopened box of Fruit Loops is packaged for sale. Half of my kitchen pantry is packaged for sale, but that doesn't mean I'm running a grocery store. Why can't somebody buy 20 small baggies of weed? You can still buy a case of beer these days, right? This so-called expert opinion regarding drug packaging is really just an excuse to enhance a possession charge into a three times more serious possession with intent to sell or deliver case (a typical possession charge is a third degree felony, punishable by up to 5 years in prison, by adding the 'intent to sell' language, you've increased the max prison to 15 years).
↧
Traffic Pursuit Near Idaho Falls
IDAHO STATE POLICE NEWS RELEASE - generated by our News Release ListServer
DO NOT REPLY
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Idaho State Police
District 6 1540 Foote Dr.
Idaho Falls, Idaho 83402-1828
(208) 525-7377 FAX: (208) 525-7294
For Immediate Release: 09/10/2013 05:06 p.m.
Please direct questions to the District Office
On September 9, 2013, at approximately 1:30 p.m., Idaho State Police located a suspect vehicle from an attempt to locate for a welfare check on a subject that was issued earlier by Jefferson County. Troopers attempted to initiate a traffic stop with the vehicle on I15, near milepost 121, just north of Idaho Falls, ID.
Floyd Long, 44, of Idaho Falls, ID, was driving south on I15 in a 1997 Ford Expedition. Long failed to stop when officers activated their emergency lights and sirens. As Long approached milepost 113, spikes were deployed. Long struck the spikes and drove off the right shoulder, through an ITD fence where the vehicle became stuck on a ditch bank, near milepost 112. Long was taken in to custody.
Idaho State Police were assisted by Bonneville County Sheriff's Office, Idaho Falls Police Department, and Idaho Falls EMS.
-------------
↧
"Freed 3-strikes inmates have low recidivism rate, report finds"
From the L.A. Times: More than 1,000 inmates previously sentenced to life in prison have been freed since voters approved changes to California's three-strikes law in November, with only a handful charged with new offenses since their release, according to...
↧
Schapelle Corby is Being Considered for Parole – But Are the Conditions Fair?
Schapelle Corby is being considered for parole, but are the conditions fair? Should she be expected to admit to something she didn’t do? Schapelle Corby, unjustly convicted of smuggling drugs into Bali in 2004, may be eligible for “parole” and may be able to return to Australia in 2018. A meeting between the Kerobokan Jail [...]
↧
↧
While the delay here was unusually long, appellant has not established prejudice based upon a deprivation of his liberty
In this criminal case, appellant, who was 15 years old at the time of the offense, was charged, along with three other youths, with acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute robbery in the second and third degrees,...
↧
2 Vehicle Crash near Shelley **UPDATE**
IDAHO STATE POLICE NEWS RELEASE - generated by our News Release ListServer
DO NOT REPLY
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Idaho State Police
District 5 5205 South 5th Ave.
Pocatello, Idaho 83204-2299
(208) 236-6466 FAX: (208) 236-6068
For Immediate Release: 9/10/2013 5:45.
Please direct questions to the District Office
On Tuesday, September 10, 2013, at approximately 3:00 p.m. the Idaho State Police investigated a two vehicle property damage crash at the intersection of US Highway 91 and 1000 North road between Shelley and Firth. Macario Oliva, 57, of Shelly, was traveling south on US Highway 91 in a 1995 GMC Manure truck when he attempted to turn left onto 1000 North road. Douglas Erickson, 59, of Layton, Utah, was also traveling south on US Highway 91 in a 2004 Chevrolet Cavalier. Erickson attempted to pass Oliva in the intersection where he struck the rear of his truck. Both lanes of travel were blocked for an hour while crews worked to remove the vehicles. Both drivers were wearing their seatbelts.
This crash is still under investigation
***
The Idaho State Police are currently investigating a two-vehicle crash on US Highway 91 at milepost 115, near Shelley. The intersection is currently blocked.
-------------
↧
Miscellaneous Utah Gun Laws
Just in case you feel like you don’t have enough laws to think about and try to obey, here are some miscellaneous Utah gun laws you can add to your thought repertoire. A Few Utah Gun Laws Don’t change, alter, remove or obliterate any names or identifying marks on any pistol or revolver without permission. [...]
↧
Update - Westbound Milwaukee On-Ramp Is Open To Westbound I84
IDAHO STATE POLICE NEWS RELEASE - generated by our News Release ListServer
DO NOT REPLY
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IDAHO STATE POLICE NEWS RELEASE
District 3 Patrol 700 S. Stratford Dr., Meridian 83642
(208) 846-7550
Fax (208) 846-7520
For Immediate Release: 09/10/2013 6:12pm
Please direct questions to the District Office
**Update**
The westbound on-ramp is now open.
**********************************************
Idaho State Police is investigating a motorcycle crash westbound I184 at the onramp to westbound I84.
At this time the westbound on-ramp from Milwaukee to continue westbound onto I84 is blocked. Ada County and Boise Police is on scene providing traffic control. Motorists should avoid the area if possible.
-------------
↧
↧
Real Estate Investor Agrees to Plead Guilty to Bid Rigging
Daniel Rosenbledt, Hillsborough, California, a Northern California real estate investor has agreed to plead guilty to his role in conspiracies to rig bids and commit mail fraud at public real estate foreclosure auctions in Northern California. Felony charges were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in San Francisco against [...]
↧
"The Border Is a Back Door for U.S. Device Searches"
From the New York Times: Newly released documents reveal how the government uses border crossings to seize and examine travelers’ electronic devices instead of obtaining a search warrant to gain access to the data. The documents detail what until now...
↧
The Sixth Circuit, By Vote of 2-1, Demonstrates That It Doesn't Believe Ohio Law Applies in Ohio
it is a peculiar provision of Ohio's death penalty law that what's referred to as the "nature and circumstances of the offense" are relevant considerations only if they weigh in favor of life rather than death.If you favored the death penalty and were designing a death penalty law (as a bunch of legislators - including one who is now a justice on the Ohio Supreme Coury - did back in 1981) you'd do it the other way around. If the crime is particularly horrific, say if the person getting killed is slowly tortured to death or burned at the stake or eviscerated while alive or something, that would go into the hopper as another reason to weigh in favor of putting the killer to death. But in Ohio, those things don't count unless evisceration or torture makes the crime and the criminal less worthy of execution.Like I say, it's peculiar. But it's what the statute written in 1981 says, and it's absolutely what the Supreme Court of Ohio said in 1996 in a case called State v. Wogenstahl:Therefore, R.C. 2929.04(B) clearly mandates that the nature and circumstances of the offense may only be "weighed" against the R.C. 2929.04(A) specifications of aggravating circumstances the defendant was found guilty of committing.(The boldface in that quote is mine, added for emphasis.)Now Wogenstahl, and that rule specifically, are definitively the law in Ohio. Except that the federal courts don't believe it. The 6th Circuit, the federal appellate court that covers Ohio, has made that clear for a while, refusing even to acknowledge the existence of Wogenstahl. Which brings me to Archie Dixon.*This morning, in its decision in Dixon v. Houk, the 6th Circuit affirmed the district court's decision to deny Archie relief. It's OK, the panel said by a vote of 2-1 the State of Ohio can go ahead and kill Archie for the murder of Chris Hammer. Sure, the trial judge wrongly kept mitigating evidence out. But hey, we don't care. Here's how it happened (and you can glean only some of this from the opinion). Archie's trial lawyers had four things they wanted to tell the jury in mitigation. They also had two reports about Archie, one from a psychologist and one from a mitigation investigator. They could have called those folks, introduced their information into evidece, but they decided they didn't want to do that. Just those four things. Then the trial judge said that they couldn't tell the jury three of the four things they wanted the jury to know. Instead of reconsidering the decision not to use the information from the reports (now that their 3/4 of their 4-fact mitigation was shot down), they went just with the one thing the judge had said he'd allow. The Ohio Supreme Court said that they should have been allowed to tell the jury about one of the things the judge forbid, but also said it wouldn't have mattered so the hell with it. And those reports the Ohio Supreme Court refused to consider and the 6th Circuit wrongly said were never presented to the state courts? Well, but nobody tried to put them before the jury.Anyhow, the 6th Circuit said, it wouldn't have mattered.On the other hand, mounds of aggravating evidence were presented at trial,which easily outweighed the value of Dixon’s scant mitigating factors. He brutally beat Hammer, attempted to break his neck, bound him to a ladder, drove him into a wooded area, allowed him to smoke a cigarette and say a prayer, and then buried him alive. The details of the kidnaping, robbery, and murder easily outweigh any effect that the evidence offered by Dixon would have had on the jury. In other words, the crime was so bad, the nature and circumstances of the offense so horrific, that --WAIT A MINUTE - THAT SHIT'S ONLY RELEVANT IF IT MAKES A DEATH SENTENCE LESS APPROPRIATE. YOU FOLKS ARE PUTTING IT ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE SCALE.Well, yeah. It's only sensible. The worse the crime, the more horrible, the more death is appropriate.BUT THAT'S NOT OHIO LAW!!! THAT'S EXACTLY WRONG!!!To which the 6th Circuit, without ever acknowledging that it has Ohio law wrong, says simply, Kill him.Which might make sense. But isn't the law.Oh, wait. It is. Not Ohio law, of course. It's the 6th Circuit's law, which they say is what Ohio law must be even if it's not. Because the 6th Circuit can do that.Law of Rule. -------------------------- *I need to be careful here. I represented Archie for many years, and I don't want to let that cloud my judgment, nor do I want to write anything that hangs on or comes to me from my representation. But there's a point that I want to make and Archie's case is the perfect vehicle for it.When a trial judge suppressed his statements to the police (a detective testified that they didn't give him his Miranda rights because they were afraid if they told him he had a right to refuse to speak with them he would refuse to speak with them), the state appealed, and the judge appointed me to defend his decision. (The court of appeals twisted the law and the facts in order to reverse and declare that the statement was admissible.) After Archie was sentenced to die, the trial judge (not the same one who suppressed the statements), appointed me to appeal his conviction and sentence, which I did in the court of appeals and then in the Ohio Supreme Court and then in a petition for writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court.
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
