I have been asked many times about this exact scenario. You were caught or detained for shoplifting, but they did not call the police. They said you’d get a letter in the mail with a fine that you had to pay. What is that? Do you have to pay them? Can they still call the [...]
Caught shoplifting, but police were not called. Do I have to pay a fine?
↧
↧
You Can Run, But You Can’t Hide….
Yes, it’s true. Family law lawyers now have access to information that can transform a case from an up-hill battle to a slam-dunk and its all thanks to the internet. Case in point: I have a client who’s ex-husband, a venture capitalist, stopped paying his child support about one year ago. Exhibiting the patience of […]
↧
Breaking Beverly Hills DUI News: Are Designated Drivers Unreliable?
To prevent a Beverly Hills DUI arrest, you should rely on designated drivers. Right?
That’s the conventional wisdom.
But a new study out of the University of Florida in Gainesville is putting that conventional wisdom to the test. According to a June 10th article at LiveScience.com, “roughly 40% of designated drivers still imbibe when they go out, many to a level that would impair them behind the wheel.”
Researchers surveyed club goers in a college town. They gave breath tests to over 1,000 people, including 165 people who labeled themselves "designated drivers." They tested these people twice – once at 10 P.M and once at 2:30 A.M. 40% – that's 4 out of 10! – of the so-called designated drivers drank. 70% of these people had BACs of between 0.02% and 0.049%. 18% – nearly a fifth of all designated drivers -- had BAC levels in excess of 0.05%.
As regular readers of this Beverly Hills DUI blog might remember, that 0.05% figure has been in the news a lot recently. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) wants to lower the DUI cut-off down to 0.05%. (Currently, the Southern California DUI cut off is still at 0.08% for most adults).
Adam Barry, an Assistant Professor of Health Education, helped run this study. He told reporters that many designated drivers probably think that they're all right to hop behind the wheel… even when they shouldn’t. Barry issued a sobering statement: "if you’re going to be a designated driver, you should abstain from alcohol use completely.”
That may be easier said and done. But if you’ve already been arrested for driving under the influence in Beverly Hills, what can you do now to contend with your charges and make better decisions about your future?
Rather than relying on intuition or building your Beverly Hills DUI defense based on what you read on the web or hear from friends, connect with the team at the Kraut Law Group to schedule a free and confidential consultation.
Attorney Michael Kraut is a Harvard Law School educated ex-prosecutor who has earned a reputation as an extremely experienced Los Angeles criminal defense attorney. He's helped many clients just like you deal with complex DUI in Beverly Hills charges.
↧
"Reducing crime by reducing incarceration"
Doug Berman at Sentencing Law & Policy excerpts this op-ed by David Cole and Marc Mauer from The Washington Times. In part: If we are to tackle the incarceration rate effectively, we need to focus not only on those who...
↧
The RIght to Bear Arms and Illinois UUW Laws
Since the Illinois Supreme Court found certain provisions of the Illinois Unlawful Use of a Weapon statute unconstitutional I started reading “The Roberts Court, the Struggle for the Constitution” by Marcia Coyle. The Second Amendment, which is part of the first ten amendments to the Constitution, is known as the Bill of Rights. The […]
↧
↧
"Sentenced to a Slow Death"
The title of this post is the headline of this new New York Times editorial discussing this week's noteworthy new ACLU report on the thousands of persons serving LWOP sentences for non-violent offenses in the United States (first discussed here)....
↧
Due Process Clause
In this DWI case, defendant was originally charged with common law driving while intoxicated (DWI), but he waived his right to trial by jury on that charge and was convicted after a bench trial of the offense of driving while...
↧
Moormann v. Perini & Hoerger
Moormann v. Perini & Hoerger
Court Discusses Legal Malpractice in Forfeiture Action
The plaintiff was arrested and charged for driving while intoxicated DWI on October 30, 2002, after a breathalyzer test revealed that his blood alcohol content was .30 percent. His motor vehicle used while driving was also seized and later held for forfeiture action. He entered a guilty felony plea for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol after waiving his right to be prosecuted by an indictment. The District Attorney then commenced an action pursuant to the Civil Practice Law and Rules seeking the plaintiff’s vehicle to be forfeited. A default judgment was entered in the District Attorney’s favor on July 2, 2003 after the plaintiff filed no answer.
The default judgment in the forfeiture proceedings led the criminal plaintiff to initiate a claim against the defendant, which was the law firm he had retained to defend his claim. The plaintiff asserted that he believed that the firm was retained for both the criminal and civil proceeding. The plaintiff further stated that he was unaware of the forfeiture action against him and the defendant made constant representations to him that they were in the process of retrieving the vehicle that the was subject of the forfeiture proceedings. The plaintiff sought to recover damages for legal malpractice and breach of the Judiciary Law (§ 487). The defendant later requested summary judgment as there was no proof that the plaintiff would have been successful in the forfeiture proceedings. A search produced no marijuana.
During the motion for summary judgment, deposition revealed that firm had knowledge of the default judgment but did not inform the plaintiff of the judgment against him. An associate at the firm revealed that there was no possibility of the plaintiff retrieving the vehicle after the default judgment but this information was also never communicated to the plaintiff. The plaintiff was informed about the judgment and the vehicle being auctioned through other sources other than the law firm. The lower court dismissed the cause of action relating to the breach of the Judiciary Law as it was duplicative to the cause of action relating to legal malpractice. Judgment was granted in the defendant’s favor as the plaintiff failed to show that he would have been successful in the forfeiture action but for the negligence of the defendant. The defendant appealed the decision as there were triable facts.
The Appellate Division held that the lower court was correct in granting summary judgment because the alleged negligence of the defendant did not cause the loss of the plaintiff’s vehicle as he would not have been successful in the forfeiture proceedings. However, the court erred in dismissing the cause of action for the violation of the Judiciary Law relating to the misconduct of an attorney as it was not duplicative to the cause of action that alleged malpractice. The statutory claim required intent to deceive whereas legal malpractice was founded on negligent conduct. Real issues of fact existed as to whether there was an intention to deceive the plaintiff by the defendant. This issue precluded the defendant from obtaining summary judgment relating to the cause of action under Judiciary Law statute associated with the misconduct of the firm arising from the failure to represent the plaintiff the forfeiture proceedings.
↧
Cyber-criminal/hacktivist gets max federal sentence of 10 years after guilty plea
As reported in this Rolling Stone piece, headlined "Cyber-Activist Jeremy Hammond Sentenced to 10 Years In Prison: The hacker, who pleaded guilty in May, is given the maximum sentence by a federal judge," a high-profile on-line criminal got a big-time...
↧
↧
On Mitigated Speech
In a comment to this post, in which I asked, “Why is it that when you tell people the truths they don’t want to hear, you are ‘angry’ and ‘acrimonious’?” “Josh C” wrote: Blunt answers, unpadded with courtesy, come accross … Continue reading →
↧
Top-Ten Recent SSRN Downloads
in criminal law and procedure ejournals are here. The usual disclaimers apply. RankDownloadsPaper Title 1 288 In God's Shadow: Unveiling the Hidden World of Domestic Violence Victims in Religious Communities Michal Gilad, University of Pennsylvania Law School, Date posted to...
↧
Updates from Durham
A few updates:The oft-delayed murder trial of Crystal Mangum is underway in Durham. (WRAL has been live-streaming the proceedings.) Testimony in the first two days has featured evidence of Mangum trying to mislead police about her name—Marcella Mangum was the preferred choice—and (as she did in the lacrosse case after police were called to Kim Roberts’ car) her going limp when handcuffed by police. A ruling by the judge presiding over the case that prosecutors could introduce evidence of Mangum’s previous arrest—in which she allegedly tried to get a knife to stab her then-boyfriend, Milton Walker—makes a conviction likely. But, then again, this is Durham.As expected, the Supreme Court declined to hear the appeal filed by Bob Ekstrand on behalf of his three clients. This decision was all but certain once the Court declined to hear the appeal from the falsely accused players.Limited claims against ex-officers Gottlieb and Himan (from the falsely accused players) and against Duke (from the three former players represented by Ekstrand) are the only remaining matters of civil litigation arising from members of the 2006 team.There is, however, one potential civil suit that could expose items related to the case. The Herald-Sun has reported that Ekstrand, who’s representing former DPD Sgt. John Shelton (who’s now working for the Durham Co. sheriff’s office), has threatened a suit against Durham for its mistreatment of Shelton.Ekstrand alleges that the DPD retaliated against Shelton because Shelton—apparently alone among Durham police officers—from the start doubted the veracity of Mangum’s tall tales in the lacrosse case. In another department, Shelton’s prescience would be grounds for praise. But, then again, this is Durham.
↧
MN - Sex-offender civil commitments bring out worst in politicians
Original Article
11/17/2013
By Ruben Rosario
Sex offenders, the modern-day lepers of society and a politician's favorite whipping boy, are back in the news.
We're talking about Minnesota's almost 700 men and one woman civilly committed after most served their prison sentences and were deemed too dangerous to be released from secure prison-like state treatment facilities in Moose Lake and St. Peter. Detainees include about 50 who were civilly committed as juveniles but never convicted of...
[[ This is a content summary only. Visit our blog for full links, videos, studies and more! ]]
↧
↧
Federal Drug Enforcement Targets Two Maryland Counties
In a recent press release the Office of the National Drug Control Policy announced the expansion of a program designed to promote collaboration between federal state and local law enforcement. The White House oversees the Office, whose mission is to combat drug trafficking and production in areas that have been identified as hot spots throughout the country. These hot spots have been labeled as high intensity drug trafficking areas or HIDTA, and have been areas of law enforcement focus since Congress created the program back in 1988. As of November 14th of this year the White House has officially added two Maryland counties to the HIDTA list. Frederick County and Cecil County will now receive the same support as the other 28 HIDTA areas in 46 states throughout the country. The support will allow Frederick and Cecil to receive federal resources including manpower, money, and intelligence. As much as $660,000 has already been earmarked for the newly designated areas, and local law enforcement in these counties should begin to see the influx of resources over the next few months.
↧
New Zealand's "Madoff" Receives 10-Year Sentence For $300 Million Ponzi Scheme
(Editor's Note: While fraud never sleeps, the blog is now back after a 12-day hiatus necessitated by the editor's recent nuptials and honeymoon. Many thanks for your continued support of the blog.)
A 63-year old man known as New Zealand's "Madoff" was handed down a 10-year sentence - the most severe sentence handed down to anyone involved in a Serious Fraud Office investigation - for perpetrating a massive Ponzi scheme that took in hundreds of millions of dollars from unsuspecting citizens. David Ross was labeled a "liar" and a "thief" by Judge Denys Barry of Wellington District Court, who handed down the record sentence. Under New Zealand laws, Ross must serve a minimum sentence of nearly six years before becoming eligible for parole.
Ross was the director of Ross Asset Management ("RAM"), which he used along with numerous associated entities to solicit investors with the promise of guaranteed and lucrative returns - including annual returns of up to nearly 40%. Investors received regular returns, and Ross was generally perceived as an astute investor. Indeed, between June 2000 and September 2012, investors believed that Ross had accumulated a collective $351 in "profits" by trading securities.
However, in late 2012, many investors began complaining about delays in scheduled payments, and in November 2012, authorities from New Zealand's Financial Markets Authority raided RAM's offices. After a Receiver was appointed and began sifting through RAM's finances, it was discovered that only $10 million remained in RAM's accounts despite previous claims of over $450 million under management. The Receiver, John Fisk, estimated that RAM took in over $300 million since 2000, keeping nearly $30 million kept as management fees while $290 million was withdrawn or paid to investors. Fisk also found that the fund was insolvent since 2007 - that is, fund outflows exceeded new investor inflows, sometimes by $60 million. When authorities raised RAM's offices in November, the scheme was on the verge of collapse. Fisk later estimated that the total losses to victims exceeded $115 million.
Ross pleaded guilty to several fraud charges in August 2013, including four false accounting charges and one charge of theft by a person in a special relationship.
Many victims decried the sentence, claiming that the term was much too lenient to discourage the scourge of financial fraud that has recently plagued New Zealand. While the 10-year term is much smaller than similar sentences across the globe - and many times smaller than the scheme perpetrated by Bernard Madoff whose name has been used as a nickname for Ross - the sentence is said to be the longest ever handed down to a failed investment company official or to anyone involved in a Serious Fraud Office prosecution. Indeed, one former SFO prosecutor speculated that the sentence was the longest he could recall for a fraud-related prosecution.
↧
Canadian Woman Charged in $40 Million Ponzi Scheme
A Vancouver woman is facing fraud charges after she was arrested and charged with masterminding a $40 million Ponzi scheme that is rumored to be the largest Ponzi scheme in Canadian history. Rashida Samji - also known as Rashida Makalai - was charged with 28 counts of fraud and theft related to approximtely $17 million in losses suffered by 14 investors between 2006 and 2012, and police believe the charges are part of a much larger fraud with significantly higher losses.
Beginning as early as 2003, Samji, a former Vancouver notary, allegedly solicited investor funds through her company, Samji & Assoc. Holdings Inc. Investors were told that their funds would be safe in Samji's notary trust accounts at several financial institutions, including Toronto-Dominion Bank ("TD Bank"). These funds would then purportedly be used as collateral for investments by Mission Hill Winery in Kelowna, British Columbia. In return, investors were promised hefty annual returns ranging from 12% to 30%. In addition to Samji's solicitation efforts, a former financial planner at Coast Capital Savings, Arvin Patel, also helped recruit approximately 90 investors to the scheme. In total, more than $80 million is estimated to have flowed into Samji's trust accounts.
However, rather than keep investor funds in notary trust accounts, Samji is alleged to have deposited investor funds into her own personal bank accounts, which she then used to make fictitious interest payments to existing investors - a hallmark of a Ponzi scheme. None of the alleged wineries linked to the scheme claimed to have any knowledge of Samji, and authorities filed civil charges against Samji in 2012 after an investigation.
Samji has since posted a $100,000 bail, and is subject to a variety of bail conditions while the case remains pending.
↧
Law-Talking Dude
I had a client pleading guilty in felony court last week; the sitting judge was out, and retired judge Mike Wilkinson was visiting, and took the plea. Wilkinson talks really fast, and as I was listening to his plea admonishments … Continue reading →
↧
↧
"In Defense of Mandatory Minimums"
This post by Robert VerBruggen appears at RealClearPolicy.com: I'd like to highlight a distinction here that will be very important. Is the problem that the sentences aremandatory -- or is it that the sentences are poorly calibrated to the crimes?...
↧
Fake Scott Greenfield
Generated by Doctor Nerve’s Markov Page, which “allows the writer to type in prose or poetry, and submit it to a Markov Chain engine. This engine munches through the writer’s text, performs a statistical analysis, and spits out statistically similar … Continue reading →
↧
Burbank DUI Sports News: Saints WR Joe Morgan Busted in Jefferson Parish
Joe Morgan, a wide receiver for the New Orleans Saints, was arrested recently for driving under the influence (not in Burbank) but in way out in Jefferson Parish, Louisiana.
The 25-year-old had been driving without a license on Earhart Expressway. when his vehicle became disabled. A state trooper found Morgan asleep in his car, near Causeway Boulevard. The trooper woke up the football star and asked him to get out of the vehicle. Police said that Morgan appeared intoxicated: he swayed on his feet, smelled of alcohol, and had bloodshot eyes. As regular readers of our Burbank DUI blog know, those are the precise symptoms that indicate that someone's been driving under the influence in Burbank.
Other common symptoms include:
• Acting in an emotionally volatile manner;
• Telling contradictory stories;
• Failing field sobriety tests, like the stand on one leg test, the horizontal gaze test, the walk the line test, and the count backwards by 3s from a 100 test.
Police also use more “scientific” methods to determine whether you're drivingDUI in Burbank. But even blood tests and breathalyzer tests are not fool-proof. Errors, mis-calibrations, misinterpretations, and misreporting can throw off results substantially.
Getting back to Morgan’s case…the trooper arrested him after finding that his blood alcohol concentration was 0.218%. That’s 2.5 times the Burbank DUI legal limit (as defined by CVC 23152(b)). Morgan was booked at Gretna Jail and released later after making a $1,150 bond.
When public figures, like professional football players, break Burbank DUI laws, they are often excoriated in the news. That’s understandable. Sports figures and celebrities are role models. When they break the law, it leaves a bad taste in the public’s mouth. Of course, there's an incredibly diverse spectrum of DUI offenses, ranging from the obviously egregious and terrifying to the “innocent and just barely across the line."
What to Do about Your DUI Defense in Burbank
First of all, no matter what happened, you’re entitled to a sound and fair defense. The team here at the Kraut Law Group can help you effectively strategize to protect your rights and maximize your chances of a positive outcome. Attorney Kraut is by no means an apologist for DUI drivers. In fact, he worked for 14 years as a prosecutor, during which time he actively and passionately prosecuted crimes like DUI.
In fact, police officers often call on attorney Kraut at the Kraut Law Group for help when their close family and friends need help with issues like Burbank DUI defense. Get in touch with the Kraut Law Group today. We can help you understand your rights and advocate for a successful outcome in your case.
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
