A new study by the American Civil Liberties Union confirms what California criminal defense attorneys are already aware of. According to the study by the American Civil Liberties Union, virtually all law enforcement agencies in the country track suspects using cell phone location tracking tools.

The American Civil Liberties Union obtained police records from than 200 police departments across the United States. In almost all of these cases, the agency found that police secretly tracked the location of cell phones using data provided by wireless carriers. In many states, the law requires law enforcement agencies and police departments to obtain a warrant, before they track cell phone locations.

In California, the American Civil Liberties Union approached a number of police departments including the Davis, Fremont, Fresno, San Jose, and San Francisco police departments. However, out of the 20 police departments that the American Civil Liberties Union approached, barely a handful responded and opened up their records to the agency. The other departments declined the request. It is therefore hard for California criminal defense lawyers to tell exactly how prevalent this practice is in California.

Cell phone tracking can take on various forms. Police officers can direct companies like Google and Apple to provide important data like cell phone location, surveillance texts and other data needed for criminal investigations. What really concerns California criminal defense attorneys is that most in many of these cases, the department tracked phones without obtaining warrants.

According to the ACLU, at least 2 of California's police departments, including the one in San Francisco seem to be going about the process of tracking cell phones the legal way. In San Francisco, the police department seeks search warrants before it tracks cell phones, while in Sacramento, the department secures court orders

(2) Comments | (0) Trackback | Permalink

The Supreme Court of New Mexico is pondering a question that's very important to many California sex crimes lawyers - does a person who has been convicted of a sex offense in California, have to register when he moves to another state?

The case involves 65-year-old Bruce Hall, who pleaded no-contest to charges of child molestation13 years ago. The specific charges against him were misdemeanor annoying and molesting a child.

Hall is still included in California's sex offender registry, but the website does not mention his whereabouts. He later moved to Las Cruces in New Mexico. However, he did not register as a sex offender there.

In 2008, prosecutors in Dona Ana County charged him with a 4th degree felony, and tried to force him to register as a sex offender in that state. He appealed, and the New Mexico Court Of Appeals ruled in his favor, finding that he did not have to register as a sex offender in that state, because New Mexico has no law which is equivalent to the one that he was convicted of violating when he was in California. Now, the state of New Mexico is asking the Supreme Court to reverse the decision.

According to Hall’s attorneys, the law that he's convicted of breaking in California does not exist in New Mexico. In New Mexico, a person must commit at least one out of 11 specific crimes to register as a sex offender. Annoying and molesting children are not among those crimes. However, prosecutors deny this, and say that the State of New Mexico does indeed have a law that is similar to the one that Hall was accused of breaking.

A decision here would determine the responsibilities of a person who is convicted of a sex crime in California and has moved to another state.

(2) Comments | (0) Trackback | Permalink

A bill that has just been proposed by a California lawmaker has the interest of California criminal defense attorney’s; the bill would make any kind of romantic relationship between a teacher and a student, a crime. This sounds like a lawmaker’s overreaction to some of the teacher sexual abuse cases that have hit the headlines recently.

Under the proposal by Representative Kristin Olsen, teachers who are dating their students, or are in a romantic relationship with a student, would be charged with a felony crime. The teacher would be charged with a crime even if the student was an adult.

The bill is called the Safe Student Act, and would make it a felony offense for any employee of a public school system to begin any kind of sexual relationship or romantic relationship, or even have excessive communication with any student of any age, even one who is above the legal age of consent.

The bill will be part of a package of bills drafted in response to the Miramonte Elementary School sexual abuse scandal earlier this year. A veteran teacher at the school was arrested and charged with numerous crimes, after it was found that he had photographed children in various situations.

According to Representative Olsen, she was alerted to the need for legislation like this after she became aware of the James Hooker case. In that case, a 41-year-old high school teacher quit his job and left his family after he began a relationship with an 18-year-old student. The two have insisted that their sexual relationship only began after the student turned 18, and no charges have been filed against the man.

According to Olson, teachers, principals and other employees of a school are in a position of authority and power, and as such, it is important to make sure that these persons do not violate the trust that students and their parents have in them.

(2) Comments | (0) Trackback | Permalink

Persons who have been convicted of a DUI offense, and have been ordered to install an ignition interlock device in the vehicle, are less likely to be arrested for DUI again, and less likely to be involved in a fatal crash. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety is using the findings of a new study to push states to enact laws that would require ignition interlock devices for all DUI offenders, even those who are convicted of drunk driving for the very first time.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety based its findings on a study that was conducted in Washington. When ignition interlock device laws in Washington were expanded to cover even first-time DUI offenders, the researchers found that the rate of repeat DUI offenders fell by approximately 12%. Earlier, the laws in that state required people who had high blood alcohol concentration levels to have ignition interlock devices installed in their vehicles. When the laws were expanded, recidivism rates dropped.

The findings of the study are likely to bolster a federal transportation bill currently under debate. The bill would require, among other things, that states enact laws requiring installation of ignition interlock devices, even for first-time DUI offenders, or risk losing federal highway safety funding.

Several states have been considering mandatory ignition interlock device installation in all vehicles of all DUI offenders, even those convicted for a first-time offense. California currently has a pilot program that is being closely watched by California criminal DUI lawyers. Under the program which is in place in Los Angeles, Tulare, Alameda and Sacramento counties, even first-time DUI offenders are required to get these devices installed in their vehicles. If the program is found to be successful in reducing DUI rates, the program would expand to the rest of the state.

(2) Comments | (0) Trackback | Permalink

Women are closing the gender gap in one more area. According to a new study, the number of women being arrested for DUI has increased substantially over the past few years. The study by the Traffic Injury Research Foundation shows that the number of DUI arrests involving women has increased by a staggering 36% over the last 10 years alone.

The trigger for the study, which was funded by the Century Council, an association of distillers, seems to have been the 2009 New York DUI accident involving Diane Schuler, the woman who drove the wrong way under the influence of alcohol and crashed her car, killing herself, four children in her car and 3 other people. The accident, which received a lot of national media attention, really spotlighted the fact that little attention is paid to prevent women from driving under the influence in this country.

Another intriguing fact that emerged from the study was the profile of the average female drunk driver. These aren't young college-age women binge-drinking with a group of friends. The average female arrested for DUI in the United States is better educated than the average male drunk driver. Not only is she more educated, she's also older than the average male drunk driver. Additionally, these women are the primary caregivers for their children, and hold low-paying jobs. Some experts have tied an increase in alcohol use and drunk driving among women with the stresses of parenting.

Men continue to comprise the majority of DUI arrests in the United States, but the gender gap is definitely narrowing. Not only that, California DUI lawyers are also concerned about the fact that binge drinking among women is on the increase. According to statistics, approximately 39% of young women in the country now routinely engage in binge drinking, an increase of 30% in 3 decades.

The feds have begun to take note. This month, the Department of Transportation’s annual focus on drunk driving is expected to target women drivers.

(2) Comments | (0) Trackback | Permalink

It’s a little rare for California criminal defense attorneys to come across a possession of child porn case involving witnesses. A University of Utah professor has pleaded not guilty to charges of watching child porn on his laptop aboard a Boston-bound flight.

Professor Grant Smith is a professor in the University of Utah's materials science and engineering department. He was arrested on Saturday, soon after he disembarked at Boston airport. He was seated in the first class section on the flight when a passenger seated right behind him, found Smith watching child porn images on his laptop. He became concerned, and took cell phone pictures of the professor in the act. The man then informed the flight attendant. The flight attendant e-mailed a relative, and asked the person to inform police. Police were waiting for the professor when the plane landed.

According to prosecutors, when the flight attendant told the professor to turn off his laptop, he became concerned and tried to delete the images of child porn. Police checked the contents of the laptop at the airport, and found several images of nude and semi-new children, including girls as young as 6 years old.

Regardless of the outcome of the case, the penalties against Professor Smith have already begun. Smith has no criminal record, and has been an employee of the University of Utah for the past 14 years. The University has already placed him on administrative leave. If convicted, the university is likely to fire him.

In California, persons who have been convicted of possession of child pornography can face up to one year in a county jail and up to 3 years in state prison. The most devastating consequence may be mandatory registration in a federal sex offender registry for life.

(2) Comments | (0) Trackback | Permalink

According to new data by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, more than half of all drug arrests in the United States last year involved marijuana crimes. In fact, 2010 saw more people being arrested for marijuana crimes than in any other year.

Last year, 853,000 people were arrested for marijuana-related crimes. That comprises 52% of all drug arrests across the country in 2010. Out of these 853,000 arrests for marijuana-related crimes, 80% were only charged with possession of marijuana, and not cultivating or distributing it. Overall, since the year 2000, approximately 7.9 million people have been arrested for marijuana-related crimes.

The percentage of marijuana arrests was highest in the Midwest where these arrests comprised 63.5% of all drug arrests. The South also saw high numbers of marijuana-related arrests with 57% of drug arrests in these states. The number of marijuana-related arrests was lowest in the West, where these comprised 49% of the total number of arrests for drug crimes.

Overall, more than 1.6 million people were arrested for drug crimes in the United States last year. Not surprisingly to Los Angeles drug crime defense lawyers, arrests for drug crimes surpassed arrest rates for all other types of crimes. In fact, in 2010, one person was arrested every 19 seconds for possession, production or manufacture of drugs. More than 81% of these arrests were for possession of drugs. In all, 750,591 drug arrests in 2010 were for possession of drugs, while just over 103,000 arrests were for production or manufacture of drugs.

Federal law enforcement agencies have to understand that arresting people every minute for a drug crime hasn't achieved any objectives, and has not made the community safer.

(2) Comments | (0) Trackback | Permalink

A new book by Roger Lancaster, professor of cultural studies at George Mason University, is forcing the review of popular attitudes towards sex offender registries. In the book, Lancaster argues that these registries are not just ineffective in preventing sex crimes, but as California criminal defense lawyers also find, also unfair to the millions of people who are included in registries with barely any violation to their name.

In the book, Lancaster talks of the unfairness of a registry system that prevents sex offenders from living or working within 2000 feet of a school, playground or any other place where children gather under Jessica's Law. Such restrictions dramatically reduce a person's chances of living a normal life after incarceration, and defeat any attempt to reintegrate the person into society. According to Lancaster, we should rethink this approach, which resembles techniques of governance in authoritarian or even totalitarian states.”

He also compares the sex offender registry system in the United States with that in Britain, which also requires sex offenders to register themselves. However, in Britain, the number of persons actually on sex offender registries is much more limited, and is a much smaller proportion of the population.

In order to understand how sex offender laws in the United States have run riot, consider this - in the United States, the ratio of registered sex offenders to the general population is 228 per 100,000. In Britain, the ratio is 46 per 100,000. Additionally, in Britain, the majority of offenders are classified as minimal risk, and require low supervision. Information from the registries is closely guarded, and can be accessed only by parole officers, law enforcement officers and other interested parties.

This is unlike in the United States, where anybody can access a sex offender registry, and make uniformed assumptions about a person's character based on his inclusion in the registry. Further, in the United States, a substantial chunk of sex offender registrants are those involved in relationships simply because one of the persons involved in the relationship was under the age of eighteen.

(2) Comments | (0) Trackback | Permalink

After spending 18 years in prison for the murder of three young boys, three men who have come to be collectively referred to by California criminal Defense lawyers, the public and the media as the West Memphis Three, have walked free from prison. Their dramatic release came after a plea deal between the men and prosecutors.

The three men, Damien Echols, Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley Junior had all been serving life sentences after they were convicted of the murder of three boys in West Memphis, Arkansas. The murders had taken place in 1993, and sent shockwaves through the state. The naked bodies of the three boys, all eight years old, were found in a canal in a wooded area of West Memphis. The bodies had been badly mutilated and tied.

For police investigating the murders, the finger of suspicion quickly pointed to Eckels, a troubled eighteen-year-old, who had an interest in heavy metal music and considered himself a Wiccan. Eckels as well as his friends Misskelley and Borden were arrested after Misskelley confessed to the murders. They were arrested in spite of the fact that Misskelley’s confession of the crime had major holes that did not match with the information that police had.

Misskelley later withdrew his confession, but it was too late. He was convicted on the basis of his confession in February 1994. Soon after, Eckels and Baldwin were convicted. Out of the three, only Eckels was on death row.
 
In recent years, there had been a flurry of support for the West Memphis Three from rockers and movie stars. Benefit concerts had been held to raise money for the men's legal defense. Then three weeks ago, prosecutors and lawyers for Eckels began working on a plea deal. Under the terms of the deal, the men maintained that they are innocent, but admitted that they were pleading guilty to charges of first and second degree murder because it was in their best interests. After the plea deal, the judge sentenced them to eighteen years in prison, which they have already served, ensuring that they were now free.

(2) Comments | (0) Trackback | Permalink

Anybody who has watched any TV cop dramas is familiar with Miranda rights.

You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to speak to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you. Do you understand these rights as they have been read to you?

Suspects in the future, however,  will likely hear a markedly different version of the Miranda rights. This is the result of a slow chipping away at these rights, to the extent that some current versions leave much room for ambiguity.

Recently, the Supreme Court made several revisions to the Miranda warnings.  During the Supreme Court session, the court placed several limits on the rights. The decisions do not change the wording of the Miranda Rights as most Americans know them. However, the Supreme Court did approve of one version of the Miranda Rights in the state of Florida.

The problem that many criminal defense lawyers have with this version is that the wording does not inform suspects that they have a right to have a lawyer present when they’re being questioned by police. The Miranda warning that is currently being used in some parts of Florida goes like this:

You have the right to talk to a lawyer before answering any of our questions. If you cannot afford to hire a lawyer, one will be appointed for you without cost and before any questioning. You have the right to use any of these rights at any time you want during this interview.

Criminal defense lawyers have argued that this version of the warning leaves room for much ambiguity, and does not make it clear to the suspect that he can have a lawyer present during his questioning. However, the court ruled that this version contains all the information a suspect needs.

There are other changes too. A suspect’s request for an attorney is now only valid for 14 days after he’s released from police custody. Two weeks after he is released from custody, police can question a suspect without having to repeat his Miranda rights.

The last change is the strangest of all. For the first time now, a suspect must inform the police that he or she intends to remain silent. In other words, your right to remain silent is only valid if you actually inform the police that you intend to remain silent.

(2) Comments | (0) Trackback | Permalink