Southern California Defense Blog

That’s the message that a recent press release from the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office sends. The press release involves the recent conviction of Ross Stanley Berton, age 61. Mr. Berton pleaded guilty to 15 counts of grand theft, two counts of offering false evidence, one count of forgery and one count of identity theft. Fifteen counts were dismissed as part of the plea agreement, the District Attorney stated.

The LA Superior Court judge who took the plea sentenced Mr. Berton to 12 years state prison. Berton, who pleaded to at least one count for each of the 16 victims, also was ordered to pay restitution totaling $346,826. He has been in custody since his arrest on January 4, 2008.

Continue reading "BE SURE YOUR LAWYER IS IN FACT A LAWYER" »

A recent press release from the California Highway Patrol announced that the agency has received a federal grant to arrest DUI drivers with outstanding warrants for failure to appear in court on DUI charges, or failure to pay fines or show proof of completion of other requirements imposed by the court after a DUI conviction.

The CHP press release described how every year individuals are arrested for DUI and enter the legal process and that some individuals either fail to appear in court or fail to pay fines associated with DUI offenses. As a result, arrest warrants are issued for these individuals. However, sometimes these warrants are not served in a timely manner allowing the violators to avoid justice until they’re apprehended.

The CHP has indicated that, in order to assure that proper attention is given to outstanding DUI felony and misdemeanor warrants, the CHP has launched a major anti-DUI crackdown through a new federal grant entitled “Stop DUI II.” This grant will allow the CHP to take an aggressive approach to reduce the number of outstanding DUI warrants by establishing teams of officers for the specific purpose of serving outstanding DUI warrants.

California Highway Patrol officers will serve these warrants and arrest the individuals who have been evading the law. The grant’s focus is on CHP’s Valley, Golden Gate and Southern Divisions and extends through December 31, 2008.

Continue reading "CHP GETS FEDERAL GRANT TO CRACKDOWN ON DUI DRIVERS WITH ARREST WARRANTS" »

Recently, the Connecticut Attorney General wanted information from MySpace as to whether any registered sex offenders had a web page on My Space. At first News Corp, which owns MySpace, did not comply with the Attorney General’s request, but eventually they turned over the information and also removed the profiles of over 7,000 MySpace participants from the site after identifying them as Registered Sex Offenders.

Interestingly enough, though, MySpace does not maintain information about the removed profiles, so in removing the registered sex offenders, they also disposed of evidence about their identities and the like.

Wallin and Klarich has developed a unique understanding of how these cases work and an aggressive, thorough approach to defending them. Defending sex crime charges is a complex and specialized type of criminal defense. Few criminal defense lawyers have the experience, training and resources necessary to win a sex-related case.

Many of us are still trying to adapt to the new dates for changing our clocks from Pacific Standard Time to Pacific Daylight Time and back, and figuring out how to get the time on our VCRs and cellular telephones to change consistent with the new rules established by the federal Energy Policy Act of 2005 – the federal legislation that changed the dates when we change our clocks.

It might seem that, for those who like to go out to restaurants and bars and imbibe, about the only thing that might be good about the twice a year ritual of changing the clocks is when the clocks are changed from Daylight Time to Standard Time (i.e., when we “Fall Back” one hour in Autumn), and here’s why.

Under California law, no bar or restaurant may sell any alcoholic beverage between the hours of 2:00AM and 6:00AM, meaning that alcoholic beverage service is closed down at 2:00AM at bars and restaurants throughout the state, and may not commence again until 6:00AM. (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 25631.) The law specifically declares that anyone who sells alcoholic beverages, “between the hours of 2 o'clock a.m. and 6 o'clock a.m. of the same day, is guilty of a misdemeanor.” (Id.)

Coincidentally, when we “Fall Back” one hour in Autumn, that time change officially occurs at 2:00AM, meaning that, officially, on the date when clocks go from Daylight Saving Time to Standard time, the time goes from 1:59AM Daylight Saving Time to 1:00AM Standard Time, thereby giving us not only an extra hour of sleep, but also an extra hour of drinking at our favorite watering hole, right?

Continue reading "CA LEGISLATURE: TIME CHANGE HAS NO IMPACT ON CLOSING TIME, MAYBE?!?!?" »

According to a recent report on Foxnews.com, this point was made clear recently to a group of teenage girls in New York, who apparently videotaped themselves confronting a younger girl, and then slapping and kicking the girl in the head and body. The girls then apparently posted the video footage of the beating on YouTube. After police discovered the video, the girls were all arrested and charged with attempted assault. It is amazing how many cases we see here at Wallin & Klarich were people would not have been prosecuted for committing crimes had they not either bragged about them on a blog or MySpace page, or posted videotape of themselves committing the crime on an Internet site such as YouTube. Of course, it is far better to not commit a crime in the first place, however, if you have done something that could expose you to arrest, posting evidence of your activities on the Internet is probably one of the worst things you can do.

A March 17, 2008 ruling by the New Jersey Supreme Court declares that results of breath tests given to DUI suspects on devices manufactured by Alcotest are sufficiently reliable to be admitted in New Jersey DUI prosecutions.

20 people who had been arrested for DUI in New Jersey collectively filed a lawsuit challenging the use of the breath tests in their cases. Specifically, the defendants argued that the manner in which the calculations were made by the device caused the devices to overestimate the breath alcohol concentration in some drivers.

The Court, after hearing four months of testimony, declared that, in the vast majority of cases, the device underestimated the person’s breath alcohol level. The Court specifically found that, although the device actually overestimated the breath alcohol level in some individuals, that was not sufficient to justify any modification of the device or discontinued use of the device.

When a person is in custody very often they feel it is "safe" to share their thoughts to other inmates. In some cases inmates may call a lawyer on the phone to ask for legal advice. In other cases an inmate who has retained a law firm may decide to discuss the facts of their case with their lawyer over a jail house phone. Based upon recent decisions of the California court of appeals you are putting your case and your freedom in great jeopardy if you use the jail house phone to speak to anyone about your case.

In addition if you speak to an inmate who is in a jail cell with you it is critical you realize that that inmate may wish to receive leniency on their case in exchange for revealing what they claim you stated to them to the prosecution. The best possible advice is to only speak to anyone who is in custody about any of the facts related to your case. In fact in some cases it can be dangerous to your safety to discuss the charges you are facing with other inmates.

Continue reading "WHAT YOU SAY CAN COME BACK TO HAUNT YOU" »

(Your Criminal Case can lead to your deportation or denial of citizenship)

It is critical that if you are not a United States citizen and are accused of a criminal offense in California must you immediately inform your criminal defense attorney of your immigration status. Your criminal defense attorney can then discuss with you your immigration status and then can have you work with immigration lawyers who can help determine what type of settlement in criminal case can avoid adverse immigration consequences.

Many people think that they know the type of criminal convictions that can lead to adverse immigration consequences. However, immigration law is highly complex and there are specific rules that are applied. Do not make the mistake of thinking you can "hide" the fact that you are not a United State Citizen from your lawyer. Your lawyer is there to help you avoid severe punishment in your criminal case. However, an experienced criminal defense law firm will want to be able to assist you with consequences that go far beyond the direct result in your criminal case.

If you are accused of a criminal offense and are not a United States citizen you should notify your California criminal defense attorney of this fact during the initial contact you have with your criminal defense law firm. Prior to the conclusion of your case it will be critical that you also consult with an immigration lawyer who can work with your criminal defense lawyer to do what is possible to avoid your deportation or denial of citizenship.

If you have any questions about this information contact Wallin and Klarich 24/7 so we can discuss this with you in more detail.

While this headline might seem so intuitive as to border on the humorous, a recent case in Los Angeles reveals that there is some benefit in conveying this message.

According to CNN.com, the case involves two elderly women who are alleged to have hatched a scheme to befriend transient men, take out hefty insurance policies on their lives, and then drug them and, while the men were drugged, to run the men over and kill them – making the accidents look like hit and run accidents involving homeless men. Then, allegedly, the women, beneficiaries under the policies of insurance, could collect the benefits.

During the trial of the two women, the prosecutor in the case played a tape recording allegedly made of the women when they were in custody together. In the recording, one woman allegedly blames the other for the pair’s downfall, stating that “it’s all your fault” and that “you can’t have that many insurers. You were greedy. That’s the problem.”

Accordingly, remember, if you or a loved one are accused of a crime, it’s best to remember these words of advice: Never open your mouth – unless you are in a dentist’s chair.

I guess green beer and corned beef and cabbage are a thing of the past.

The web site The Smoking Gun recently reported that, on March 17, 2008, Ohio law enforcement officers seized crack cocaine that had been dyed green as the Emerald Isle itself – in honor of St. Patrick’s Day.

This is not the first time that narcotics officers had seen crack cocaine dyed for festive purposes. One of the Ohio officers noted that some dealers had dyed their supply red during the Christmas season.

With more than 30 years of experience defending clients facing drug charges in California, we have the skills and knowledge to help you get the best outcome. Call us today for a free evaluation of your case.

At Wallin & Klarich we approach every case with the attitude that the person we are defending could be one of our own family members. We know the stress and strain that drug cases can cause to a person and their family. We are here to help answer your questions 7 days a week, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.

A recent report on the program “60 Minutes,” detailing the case of Alton Logan revealed what can happen when concepts of law and morality collide.

Mr. Logan was charged with first-degree murder in connection with the murder of a security guard at a McDonald’s restaurant in Chicago in 1982. Police arrested him after receiving a tip, and got three eyewitnesses to identify him as the killer. Mr. Logan, as well as his mother and brother, testified that he was at home during the time of the killing and that he had nothing to do with the death of the security guard. The jury nonetheless returned a verdict of guilty, and Mr. Logan was sentenced to life in prison. In fact, the jury had voted 10-2 in favor of the DEATH PENALTY against Mr. Logan, but, because the verdict was not unanimous, Mr. Logan received a sentence of life in prison.

The “secret” here involves another man, Andrew Wilson, and his two attorneys, Dale Coventry and Jamie Kunz. Apparently, at about the same time that Mr. Logan was being charged in the death of the McDonald’s security guard, Kunz and Coventry were representing Wilson on unrelated charges that he had killed two policemen. When Kunz and Coventry discussed that case with Wilson, Wilson revealed to them that it was he, Wilson, and not Logan, who had killed the security guard at the McDonald’s. The problem was that Kunz’s and Coventry’s client, Wilson, had instructed his attorneys to keep this information confidential until after Wilson’s death.

Continue reading "26 YEAR SECRET KEEPS INNOCENT MAN IN PRISON" »

BREATH MACHINES USED BY LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS TO DETERMINE A DRIVER'S BLOOD ALCOHOL CONTENT HAVE A SLOPE DETECTOR TO DETERMINE IF MOUTH ALCOHOL IS PRESENT DURING THE SAMPLE. TITLE 17 OF THE CALIFORNIA CODE OR REGULATIONS REQUIRES OFFICERS TO PERSONALLY OBSERVE AN INDIVIDUAL FOR AT LEAST 15 MINUTES BEFORE ADMINISTERING THE BREATH TEST TO MAKE SURE THEY DO NOT REGURGITATE, VOMIT, OR BURP TO AVOID THE MOUTH ALCOHOL READING.

THE PURPOSE OF THE SLOPE DETECTOR IS TO ABORT THE TEST AND SHOW THE RESULT AS AN "INVALID SAMPLE." A RECENT STUDY SHOWED THAT IN 48% OF THE TESTS PERFORMED, A NUMERICAL RESULT WAS PRODUCTED BETWEEN .02 AND .43% AND IN ONLY 52% OF THE TESTS DID IT REGISTER AS AN "INVALID SAMPLE."

THIS STUDY NOW RAISES THE CONCERNS AS TO THE ABILITY OF THE SLOPE DETECTOR TO ACCURATELY DETECT MOUTH ALCOHOL.

IF YOU ARE FACING A CALIFORNIA DUI CHARGE AND TOOK A BREATH TEST YOU SHOULD CONSULT WITH AN ATTORNEY FROM WALLIN & KLARICH.

IT IS EXREMELY IMPORTANT TO SEAL YOUR JUVENILE RECORD IN THE UNFORTUNATE EVENT YOU ARE ARRESTED ON ANOTHER CHARGE AS AN ADULT. IF YOU ARE CONVICTED OF A CRIME, PROBATION OFFICERS FILE A REPORT WITH THE COURT AND MAKE CERTAIN RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING YOUR SENTENCE. THESE REPORTS ADDRESS FACTORS IN AGGREVATION AND MITIGATION. A PRIOR JUVENILE CONVICTION IS A FACTOR IN AGGREVATION FOR INCREASED PUNISHMENT. HOWEVER, IF YOUR JUVENILE RECORD HAS BEEN SEALED, THE JUVENILE CONVICTION IS DEEMED TO HAVE NEVER OCCURRED AND THE PROBATION OFFICER CANNOT INCLUDE THAT CONVICTION IN HIS/HER REPORT TO THE COURT.

THE ATTORNEYS AT WALLIN & KLARICH CAN ASSIST TO SEAL YOUR JUVENILE RECORDS.

Wallin & Klarich gets calls from across the country on arrest warrants. One situation that comes up is Social Security checks a person for warrants. They may find a warrant that is decades old. They will threaten to cut off Social Security because of the warrant. Naturally that’s a high problem if you are outside San Diego. An attorney may be able to get the warrant recalled and the case handled without you ever appearing. Social Security is satisfied if the warrant is recalled. It’s simply cost effective to hire the lawyer and start the ball rolling. That’s one of the things we do, and do right, at Wallin & Klarich.

Call Wallin & Klarich and we can answer any legal questions you may have. You can also check out our website at www.wklaw.com.

Newsweek reported recently on the case of Eliot Spitzer, the disgraced former governor of the State of New York who resigned after his alleged dalliance with a prostitute in a Washington, DC hotel became public. So who brought the governor down? It would seem Osama bin Laden. What??

How, exactly, does one link the downfall of a New York State governor because of his purported tryst with a call girl to a terror mastermind?

Well, according to the Newsweek article, after the coordinated terrorist attacks perpetrated by bin Laden and his al Qaeda cohorts in New York City, Washington, DC, and Shanksville, Pennsylvania on September 11, 2001, Congress replied by enacting the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (aka the “USA Patriot Act” or, simply the “Patriot Act”). The Act, in part, was designed to detect terrorist money laundering activity, and the US Treasury Department enacted regulations in order to help it to enforce the Patriot Act, including, specifically, the requirement that banks monitor their customers’ transactions and report suspicious activity to the US Treasury Department – known as Suspicious Activity Reports or “SAR.”

Continue reading "UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES" »

The United States Supreme Court heard arguments recently in a case involving a challenge to Washington, DC’s ban on the possession of handguns. The law had been challenged by a resident of Washington, DC on the ground that the law runs contrary to the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.

The Second Amendment provides, in its entirety, “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

At issue here is whether the Amendment protects an individual person’s right to possess a firearm (i.e., the “Individual Rights” theory), or whether the right to “keep and bear arms” is only tied to service in a state militia, such as, for instance, the National Guard (i.e., the “Collective Rights” theory). The United States Supreme Court has never squarely answered this question.

Even if the Court adopts the “Individual Rights” theory, the Court must still decide to what extent the right to own a gun can be limited consistent with the Second Amendment. As with other Constitutional Rights, there are very few rights that are absolute. For instance, one’s right to freedom of speech could not be said to protect the right to threaten to kill one’s spouse.

A decision is expected in the case sometime before June, when the Court recesses for the Summer.

Imagine doing your time in prison, thinking you are going to be released on a certain date, and then that day comes and goes and you are still in prison. This cannot happen, right? Well, believe it or not, it is happening in California!

A recent study found that as many as 33,000 state inmates served longer sentences than they should have. Meanwhile, another smaller study found that of the 679 inmates randomly selected, 354 of them were on track to overstay their prison sentence a combined 104 years! So, why is this happening? It is happening because these inmates are not being credited with the appropriate amount of time to be deducted from their prison sentence, as a result of working in the prisons or for good behavior (commonly referred to as “good time/work time”).

Most inmates are entitled to have their prison sentences reduced by 50% under normal circumstances for “good time/work time”(although there are several different exceptions for why this would not be the case; for example crimes punished under the “three-strikes law”, etc.) However, as indicated by these recent studies, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) does not seem to care to follow the law!

If you feel that a loved is serving more time in prison than they should be, call Wallin and Klarich immediately! Wallin and Klarich has been in the business of helping people with their criminal matters in their time of need for over 30 years. A qualified criminal defense attorney from the firm will be able to evaluate their case immediately to see if the CDCR is following the law!

Under a new law scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2009, if you are detained by a peace officer on suspicion that you have been drinking and driving, you would be required to submit to breath testing if requested by the officer, and, if your blood alcohol level is a 0.01 percent or greater, your license will be subject to suspension by the DMV. Additionally, you can be charged with an infraction, as well as with violating your probation. Finally, the new law gives the officer authority to tow and impound your vehicle at your expense if you are on probation for a DUI and you are caught driving with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.01 percent or higher. Additionally, if you refuse to take the breath test, your license will be subject to suspension by DMV and you will also be subjected to a potential charge of violating your probation.

In criminal proceedings, a person charged with a crime has a right to a speedy trial. For those charged with California misdemeanors, that means you have a right to a speedy trial within 45 days, if you are not in jail, or 30 days if you are in custody. In felony matters, this means you have the right to a speedy trial within 60 days. Now in many cases, your attorney will need this much time, if not more, to gather evidence, discuss your case thoroughly with the prosecution and be sure they can provide you with the best possible defense.

In some instances, this may require that you agree to continue your case and “waive” your right to a speedy trial within 60 days. Each case is different and some situations may warrant a refusal to waive time, and exercise your rights to a speedy trial.

A violation of your right to a speedy trial, without your permission could result in serious consequences for the prosecution, and a huge benefit for the person charged with a crime, including dismissal of all charges.

Continue reading "To waive, or not to waive time, that is the question! " »

A law signed by Gov. Schwarzenegger requires, after July 1, 2008, that all people applying for a driver’s license, or renewal of a driver’s license, sign a declaration with the following language: “I am hereby advised that being under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or both, impairs the ability to safely operate a motor vehicle. Therefore, it is extremely dangerous to human life to drive while under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or both. If I drive while under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or both, and as a result, a person is killed, I can be charged with murder.” (Veh. Code, § 13385, subd. (a).)

So what’s the big deal, you ask? Well, under the law, a person who causes the death of another because of criminal negligence (i.e., a person who does an act that is very dangerous to human life, but does not realize how dangerous it is) is generally considered to be less blameworthy than a person who causes the death of another because of reckless conduct (i.e., a person who knows an act is dangerous to human life and, in spite of that knowledge, the person does the act anyway). That is often the difference between murder, with its possible 15 to life sentence, and manslaughter, with its much shorter potential sentence.

Continue reading "THE DEATH OF VEHICULAR MANSLAUGHTER" »

With the recent "law and order" attitude that seems to prevail in our society it is fueling our state legislators to continue to pass laws increase prison sentences for those convicted of crimes. A direct result of this hysteria is to bring our jail system to the brink of disaster.

At the present time the Los Angeles County Jail is so overcrowded that if you have the misfortune of finding yourself a guest it is a real possibility you will be forced to sleep on a cold concrete floor without a mattress. Our states prison population continues to rise and currently is at a prison population that is 580 percent higher than twenty years ago. There is no end in sight.

The "soft on crime" vies that are promoted on many radio and television talk shows only increases the stampede to put more people in prison. The result could not be worse economically for a California economy that finds itself drowning in debt. At present the California penal system costs our taxpayers over TEN BILLION dollars a year. Yet what are we doing to try to "solve the problem"? It seems like very little.

Continue reading "WHAT IS WRONG WITH OUR CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM" »

Usually if someone over 18 is caught smoking weed with someone under 18, they will be charged with the misdemeanor crime of contributing to the delinquency of a minor.

However lately the District Attorney’s office has been choosing to punish the exact same act with felony consequences. The same act of contributing to the delinquency of a minor can also be charged as a felony, Health and Safety code 11361 (b)(1) which is furnishing Marijuana to a minor. The code says that if someone is found to administer, furnish, sell, or offer to furnish, administer, or sell marijuana to someone under the age of 18, they will face felony charges.

Furthermore the minimum sentence to this charge is 3 years. This means smoking a small joint with your kid brother or sister could land you in jail for 3 years, and that is only the minimum sentence.

At least if there is a person under age 18 in the vehicle. Effective January 1, 2008, it is unlawful in California for any person in a motor vehicle (whether a driver or passenger) to have in his or her possession, a lighted pipe, cigar, or cigarette, if there is a minor in the vehicle. The law applies whether the vehicle is moving or is at rest. Any person caught violating this law may be punished by fine not to exceed $100. Law enforcement officers are not permitted to stop a motor vehicle for the sole purpose of determining whether a person is in violation of this law. California is actually the third state to ban smoking in cars where minors are present, however, it is the first state to apply the law to all minors under age 18. In 2006, Arkansas and Louisiana both passed similar laws, however, the Arkansas law applies to children up to age 6, and the Louisiana law applies only to children up to age 13. A 2005 survey found that Californians vastly supported such a law, including 90% of smokers. The legislature recognized that current law, Health and Safety Code section 104495, prohibits smoking within 25 feet of a playground or tot lot sandbox area, and that the new legislation would further protect minors from the harmful effects of secondhand smoke.