California Criminal Defense Lawyers

In June of 2008 the US Supreme Court clarified the Right to Bear Arms as guaranteed in the 2^nd Amendment. Three Washington D.C. weapons laws were ruled unconstitutional by this clarification but one case arising out of San Diego wasn’t so lucky.

Miguel Flores was convicted of several charges in 2007 after fleeing from police and being discovered with a loaded firearm in his waistband. He was sentenced to 3 years probation for these charges. He appealed on the basis that the conviction violated his right to bear arms.

The California 4^th District Court of Appeals ruled that the arrest and subsequent conviction did not violate Mr. Flores 2^nd amendment rights and his conviction and sentence were upheld.

What the Supreme Court did rule was that 2 specific DC laws were in direct violation of the 2^nd amendment. Supreme Court justices ruled 5 to 4 that the right to bear arms applied to people “possessing and carrying weapons in case of confrontation”.

This interpretation meant that DC laws prohibiting firearms in the home for self-defense were unconstitutional, and rightfully so. A man’s home is his castle and I don’t know of many people that would be comfortable being told they couldn’t have a gun in their home. Even those of us who don’t own firearms would likely take issue with such a law.

Second Amendment rights are frequently discussed by people who don’t fully understand their purpose and application. While we do have a right to protect ourselves and to own weapons, there are laws that must be applied to control this freedom in fear of it being taken advantage of.

Knowing and acting within the laws governing weapons and firearms can be confusing and easy to misinterpret. A few of the more common CA weapons offenses are described here. Check out the legal language used here, however, in the state law books.

It’s easy to see how people can misunderstand and break the laws regarding firearms. There really isn’t any doubt that running from police with a gun in your waistband is illegal but not all cases are this cut and dry.

As of this week, it is illegal under California law to “skim”, steal, or download data from an RFID (radio frequency identification) device.

RFID chips are used in a host of consumer devices, from credit cards, ID cards, and keyless lock mechanisms for cars and office doors. They communicate data wirelessly to authenticate a wide variety of different transactions.

The penalty for this misdeameanor charge is up to 1 year in jail, and a $1500 fine, just for accessing and downloading the data in the RFID device. In many cases, doing so is for purposes of fraud, theft, or other criminal violations, so other related offenses may also be brought in these cases.

—

If you are accused of any kind of theft, fraud, or other criminal offense in California, please contact us for a legal case evaluation and consultation.

In addition to previous mentioned controversies about California’s Proposition 6, a ballot initiative to increase some criminal penalties and criminal justice funding, new questions are emerging. As can be the case with these massive proposals, there are small facts buried deep in the text that can have significant impact.

As noted by one local editorial board, the measure will:

• Require yearly criminal background checks on anyone living in California public housing; and
• It will create a new state agency tasked to created and distribute public services announcements about crime issues.

These may or may not be worthwhile efforts, but the sheer complexity and bureaucracy of this effort is staggering. A ballot measure that has the primary goal of helping to reduce gang violence and criminal conduct by creating tougher penalties, and providing additional law enforcement resources in that effort is really a billion dollar gift to every state law enforcement agency’s wish list.

These ideas should be argued on their individual merits, and considered in the context of California’s severe budget problems.

Everyone wants safer streets, but it is impossible to judge the merits of such a complicated and expensive bill. And money spent here will have real trade-offs and impact other existing and proposed efforts to improve the quality of life for everyone in California.

UPDATE: the San Jose Mercury News Editorial Board comes down hard against this proposal, calling it a “hand out” to prosecutors, sherrifs, and police. They suggest that this massive bill is simply throwing more money at many failed law enforcement initiatives, at a time when crime is going down, and the state budget is facing critical shortfalls.

In a move to provide additional prosecution resources to so-called “quality of life” issues in Oakland, city attorneys will be tasked to being prosecuting misdemeanor charges in the city. Until now, criminal prosecutions have been the responsibility of the Alemeda County District Attorney’s Office, and city attorneys have worked exclusively on civil charges. The move will give added resources and priorities to offenses like disorderly conduct, drunk in public, and minor drug possession charges, without taking any resources from the County DA’s office whose primary focus will remain dangerous felony offenses.

According to the news article, less than 10% of the property and assault related crimes reported to city police resulted in charges filed, though it’s unclear how many of those cases were not pursued simply due to limited prosecution resources. But the goal is this program is to prosecute more of these crimes that affect the livability of the city neighborhoods.

It is unclear whether the result of these additional prosecution resources will be stepped up enforcement of these kinds of charges by Oakland police, or simply a more efficient and targeted response to existing incidents.

–

Charged with a criminal offense in California courts? Contact our experienced defense attorneys for a free consultation and legal evaluation of the charges against you.

Another controversial California criminal law ballot initiative to be voted on this November is Proposition 6. Known as the Police and Law Enforcement Funding and Criminal Penalties and Laws Initiative Statute, the proposal will require a minimum of nearly one billion dollars in state funding for California law enforcement. This will be an increase of at least $365 million in the first year.

Among the initiatives are:

• Increase penalties and toughen law enforcement procedures and processes for any crime deemed to be “gang related”
• Gang related criminal charges include car theft and methamphetamine distribution. Any meth possession will also become a felony charge.
• Increased funding for many different criminal law enforcement related functions primarily local police and sheriffs offices, as well as probation programs, juvenile justice programs, offender rehabilitation, construction of new county jails,
• Allowed admission of “hearsay evidence” in criminal court will be expanded to include cases where someone has “tampered with or otherwise intimidated a witness”

The full text of the proposition is here, as well as a detailed analysis.

A broad coalition of law enforcement agencies such as the California Police Chief’s Association, and the California District Attorney Association support the bill. That is not surprising, and they are not objective parties, since they are likely to benefit significantly with increased resources from the bill.

Opponents of Proposition 6 is largely based around the enormous costs of the proposal, at a time when California has significant budget shortfall.

—

If you are charged with a criminal offense in California, please contact our law offices for a free legal consultation on you case.

Controversy and differing opinions surround California’s Proposition 9, or Marsy’s Law, a victims rights bill on the ballot in November.  The proposed legislation would add a Crime Victim’s Bill of Rights to the state Constitution, as well as mandate additional funding for prisons.

Supporters of the bill suggest that current crime victims rights and procedures are inadequate. The biggest item is the funding to insure that prisons have sufficient funding to keep criminals in prison for the entire term of their sentence. One of the current issues with how California prisons manage criminals is that prison overcapacity and overcrowding does often result in earlier release times for some prisoners.

Among the additional proposed provisions are:

• Fewer parole hearings for the most serious offenders
• Required advanced notification to victims/families when criminals are scheduled for parole hearings

Critics say that California law already consists of a statutory crime victims bill of rights, and the Constitutional amendment would be redundant and unnecessary.

In addition, the requirement to fund full prison sentences would add hundreds of millions in costs in building new prisons, as well as additional costs in managing the states prison and probation systems to California’s already massive budget deficit.

Many San Francisco juvenile felony offenders (17 out of 58, nearly 30%) are adults, authorities have determined. Classification as juvenile offenders allows undocumented immigrants to avoid deportation under the law.

Critics charge that this is a clear abuse of San Francisco’s sanctuary policies about undocumented individuals. And a costly one at that, since San Francisco’s Juvenile Probation Department pays expenses for these offenders to live in group homes.

And Mayor Newsom agrees. As of July 2, San Francisco will no longer honor sanctuary laws for anyone who has been convicted of a crime in California court. Many of the 58 individuals, legal and illegal, in the juvenile program were charged and convicted of dealing drugs.

Supporters of San Francisco’s sanctuary status believe the benefits of the policy far outweigh the downsides of those who may be gaming the system.

Under the same set of circumstances surrounding a felony charge, adults are turned over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and are nearly always deported if found to be illegal immigrants.

Another California police jurisdiction (this time in Palm Desert) is employing automatic license plate scanners to search for cars and drivers with legal issues, expired licenses, outstanding warrants, and more. In the case of the article cited, the scanners located a stolen vehicle, but this same system also flags drivers with criminal warrants, expired drivers licenses, and more.

How do the License Plate Scanners Work?

1. Video cameras are mounted on police cars that could be either parked by the road, or driving down the highway.
2. The cameras are connected to computers in the police vehicles that use optical scanning and character recognition software to translate every video image of a license plate into scanned data.
3. Every license plate number scanned is instantly matched with an on-board database of flagged license plates, that is either updated in real time, or downloaded daily. The data comes from the DMV, or other law enforcement databases that is matched with known stolen vehicles. The data is also matched to the owner of the vehicle. If the owner of the vehicle is known to have a suspended driver’s license, outstanding criminal warrant, or other issue, the police officer in the vehicle is instantly alerted, and instructed to pull over that vehicle.

The technology can potentially scan thousands of cars her hour.

Isn’t that a little Big Brother-ish?

It is, yes, many people think so. But these scanning and surveillance abilities have survived court challenges so far, so they are likely hear to stay. All you can do is be aware that these systems exist, and are only going to become more commonplace as the technology gets cheaper.

The bottom line is that if you have any outstanding warrant for failure to appear in court, or are driving with a license that is under suspension, you need to understand the huge risks you are taking. If you are arrested, you will very likely go to jail.

And many of these problems can be avoided with an experienced criminal defense lawyer to tackle these problems, clear your name, and maintain your freedom. Please contact us right away to find out how we can help you out of any criminal issue in California.