Southern California Defense Blog

To decide if an arrest was made, courts consider where "in view of all the circumstances surrounding the incident, a reasonable person would have believed that he was not free to leave." (United States v. Mendenhall, 466 U.S. 544, 1980).

An arrest must be based upon probable cause to believe that a crime was committed and that the arrestee committed it (Beck v. Ohio, 379 U.S. 89, 1964).

If you have questions about the lawfulness of an arrest or any criminal defense questions contact the California skilled criminal defense lawyers from Wallin & Klarich for a consultation at 1-888-280-6839. Also, visit us online at www.wklaw.com.

What a Criminal Defense Attorney Can Tell You

The United States Supreme Court has specifically approved the use of limited sobriety checkpoints. The Court in Michigan v. Sitz, 496 U.S.444 (1990) held that sobriety checkpoints must: (1) present only a slight intrusion; (2) operate according to a plan that limits participating officers' discretion; and (3) be aimed at curbing the problem of impaired drivers.

If you have questions about a sobriety checkpoint or roadblock or another criminal defense matter, contact the skilled criminal defense lawyers in California from Wallin & Klarich for a consultation at 1-888-280-6839. Also, visit us online at www.wklaw.com.

Santa Ana, California is the most populous city in Orange County, with an estimated 2007 population of 339. If current estimates hold true, Santa Ana’s population will have grown to 355,662 by 2009. Santa Ana, according to the 2000 United States Census, is one of the most densely populated cities in the United States (of cities that have more than 300,000 people), with 12,471.5 people per square mile, ranking behind only New York City, San Francisco, and Chicago. With such a dense population, a substantial amount of drivers can be accused of driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, and with the assistance of experienced Santa Ana criminal defense lawyers, those accused can receive the legal counsel and representation they need.

Boosting a projected population growth of about 5% over the last two years, from 2007-2009, Santa Ana is home to numerous people, which accounts for busy streets and drivers in a rush who in a lapse of judgment can exhibit poor driving skills that law enforcement can sometimes perceive to be drunk driving, when in fact, the accused is innocent. When charged with DUI in Santa Ana, most people do not realize just how many consequences they face. First of all, in most cases you will have to go to a DMV Hearing, which must be requested within 10 days of your arrest, to protect your driving privileges so that your license is not suspended. If you fail to request a DMV hearing, your driver’s license will automatically be suspended for four months or longer if this isn’t your first DUI offense.

At Wallin & Klarich, our skilled Santa Ana DUI defense lawyers have been defending the rights of those accused of driving under the influence for many years. We work tirelessly to negotiate a reduced charge so that our clients stay out of jail and can retain their driving privileges to carry on a productive life. The knowledgeable and aggressive Santa Ana criminal defense attorneys at Wallin & Klarich are available to assist you with your specific case, whether it’s for driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or any other kind of criminal offense. With our 30 years of experience in criminal defense, our attorneys are familiar with local courts, procedures, prosecutors, and judges. Call us today for a case evaluation at 888-280-6839.

As the law offices of Wallin & Klarich work alongside attorney Robert C. Kasenow, II in defending the rights of our client accused of alleged sexual offenses, we have filed a petition for review with the California Supreme Court seeking evaluation of a lower court order. Exculpatory evidence through subpoena or any other court process has previously been denied via the federal Stored Electronic Communications Act.

Through our investigation and the nature of the two complainants’ contrary statements to law enforcement regarding the alleged assaults and stating that they did not know each other during the initial investigation, they are “friends” on Facebook and both have Myspace accounts. We believe there is a “connection” between the two complaints and that the information we are seeking from the complainants’ social networking site accounts will demonstrate that the two discussed their respective stories before speaking with law enforcement.

At Wallin & Klarich, it is our position as California criminal defense attorneys that, as is the instance with any other kind of business records, such as medical records, school records, telephone records, or accounting records, the defense should have the ability to require Mysapce and Facebook to release, under seal, to the Court, any exchanges the complainants may have made between one another. How can a case proceed without a confidential “in camera” review by the Court to assess the social networking site account content to determine whether they contain relevant or exculpatory evidence?

Continue reading "Facebook and Myspace Disclosure of Evidence that Holds a Defendant’s Innocence" »

Why Hiring an Experienced Criminal Defense Firm Can Assure You Are Given Access to All Available Court Programs

Defendant, Oscar Armando Ochoa pled guilty to possessing cocaine after the trial court denied his motion to defer entry of judgment under penal code §1000. On appeal in California, Mr. Ochoa argued that the court erred in finding that his January 2006 conviction for possession of marijuana occurring more than two years before his current offense did not render him ineligible for deferred entry of judgment under penal code §1000.

The prosecution took the position that he was ineligible presumably because he was precluded from satisfying the condition that he “have no conviction for any offense involving controlled substances prior to the alleged commission of the charged offense.” PC §1000 (a)(1).

The California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District disagreed with the prosecution. It held that Mr. Ochoa’s previous conviction for marijuana possession should have been destroyed after two years as required by Health & Safety Code §11361.5 and §11361.7 (a). Therefore, the previous marijuana charge could not have been considered by the trial court in determining Mr. Ochoa’s eligibility for deferred entry of judgment pursuant to penal code §1000.

Continue reading "Marijuana Possession Conviction Occurring Before Current Offense Does Not Negate Eligibility for Deferred Entry of Judgment" »

Lessons From a Criminal Defense Lawyer

It is possible for an officer to unintentionally or unlawfully arrest a person? If an officer arrests a person without sufficient probable cause, this is often referred to as a "false arrest." The consequences of an improper arrest can include suppression of any testimonial statements by the suspect, suppression of physical evidence, and personal liability for the officer.

In addition, a factual innocence motion can be drafted in an effort to clear the tarnish of an arrest on your criminal record. If you feel that you were unlawfully arrested or that you are factually innocent, contact the skilled CA criminal defense lawyers from Wallin & Klarich for a consultation at 1-888-280-6839. Also, visit us online at www.wklaw.com.

Long Beach, California is situated about 20 miles south of downtown Los Angeles. The second largest city in Los Angeles County, Long Beach boasts an estimated population of about 493,000 throughout its 65.9 square miles. Long Beach is home to the Port of Long Beach, one of the world’s largest shipping ports. Aside from shipping, the city’s economy is stimulated through the manufacturing of goods, such as aircraft (Boeing) and automobile parts, is the corporate headquarters for large corporations such as Epson America and SCAN Health Plan, and even has a large oil industry (with oil deposits both underground and offshore). As is the case for most booming cities, Long Beach has alleged incidents of driving under the influence and other crimes. Those who are accused have rights and deserve a fair trial and quality legal representation from an experienced Long Beach criminal defense attorney.

When charged with DUI in Long Beach, most people do not realize just how many consequences they face. First of all, in most cases you will have to go to a DMV Hearing, which must be requested within 10 days of your arrest, to protect your driving privileges so that your license is not suspended. If you fail to request a DMV hearing, your driver’s license will automatically be suspended for four months or longer if this isn’t your first DUI offense. At Wallin & Klarich, our skilled Long Beach DUI defense lawyers have been defending the rights of those accused of driving under the influence for many years. We work tirelessly to negotiate a reduced charge so that our clients stay out of jail and can retain their driving privileges to carry on a productive life.

The aggressive and knowledgeable Long Beach criminal defense attorneys at Wallin & Klarich are available to assist you with your specific case, whether it’s for driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or any other kind of criminal offense. With our 30 years of experience in criminal defense, our attorneys are familiar with local courts, procedures, prosecutors, and judges. Call us today for a case evaluation at 888-280-6839.

The U.S. Supreme Court recently decided a strip search was illegal where a minor student was suspected of carrying Ibuprofen on campus. During an incident in 2003 at Safford Middle School, a student told school officials that Savana Redding was carrying the painkillers. Two female staffers proceeded to conduct the strip search of Redding, but found no pills. The Supreme Court affirmed the 9th U.S. Circuit of Appeals ruling in Safford United School District v. Redding (DJDAR 9383).

The decision of the court was based in part on existing California rulings, where strip searches in schools are banned.

In its decision, the court held that the school officials search violated Redding’s Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures because it went beyond the grounds of “reasonableness” that were defined by a previous case in 1985. The court opinioned that the content of the suspicion of a drug offense failed to match the degree of intrusion on Redding, mostly due to the lack of evidence of any danger to Redding or other students under the circumstances. Justice Souter clarified that there must be a “reasonable suspicion of danger” before school officials can “make the quantum leap from outer clothes and backpacks to exposure of intimate parts.”

Continue reading "Know Your Rights: Students Are Protected from Strip Searches by School Officials" »

Whether Consent Given by Driver to Search Vehicle Was Given Voluntarily Requires Analysis by an Experienced Criminal Defense Attorney Who Understands the Fourth Amendment

Voluntariness of consent to search must be analyzed under the Fourth Amendment and Article 1, section 5 of The United States Constitution "by examining the totality of the circumstances." Ohio v. Robinette, 519 U.S. at 39; State v. Sherburne, 571 A.2d 1181, 1185 (Me. 1990).

Consent to search may be found if the detainment of a suspect by an officer has ended and the continued presence of the suspect becomes voluntary and consensual. For instance, a traffic stop which has risen to the level of a detention may be converted into a consensual encounter. The first step courts look to is whether the officer returned all documents to the driver. Returning documents to the driver or issuing a citation or warning will generally convert the traffic stop into a consensual encounter (United States v. West, 219 F.3d, 171, 2000).

Continue reading "The Fourth Amendment and Consent to Search a Vehicle" »

Lessons From a Criminal Defense Attorney

The traditional definition of arrest by an officer includes the following elements: (1) intent to arrest communicated by words or actions of the officer; (2) show of the officer's authority; (3) submission to custody or sufficient force to achieve custody by the officer; and (4) the person's understanding that he or she is under arrest.

California statutorily defines an arrest as "taking a person into custody, in a case and in the manner authorized by law."

Each citizen is entitled to certain fundamental constitutional rights. An arrest occurs when an officer deprives a person of one of those fundamental rights in a significant way.

Continue reading "An Arrest Occurs When an Officer Deprives a Person of Liberty in a Significant Way" »

Why You Need a Highly Skilled Criminal Appeals Law Firm to Help You

In a case decided on July 7, 2009, the 9th District Federal Court of Appeals reversed the murder conviction of Mohammend Ali due to the courts finding that the prosecutor had committed prejudicial error when he excused the only two black prospective jurors from the jury pool.

At the trial, the defendant’s attorney had objected to the removal of the only two black jurors. However, the trial judge overruled his objection and found that the prosecutor had a “legitimate reason” for excusing the two jurors. The jury then found defendant guilty of first degree murder and the judge sentenced him to 55 years to life in prison.

What was amazing is that while the defendant continued to appeal his conviction, which occurred in 2001, no court would agree with him. First the California Court of Appeal rejected his argument, then the California Supreme Court turned him down. The defendant then turned to the federal court but the federal district court also stated that the prosecutor did not commit reversible error.

The good news is that the defendant was wise enough to keep “fighting” for his freedom through seeking appeals. Finally, the 9th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals agreed with him and ordered that he be given a new trial. In the event that the prosecution did not take him to trial in the near future, he would be ordered to be released from custody. This is a man who was facing the rest of his life in prison.

Continue reading "9th District Federal Court of Appeals Reverses Murder Conviction After all State Courts Reject Appeal" »

In People vs. Stuckey, decided by the 3rd District Court of Appeals on July 9, 2009 the court held that a defendant who is facing sentencing does not have the right to court appointed experts. The court held that the right to court appointed experts exists only up to the time of jury trial. Once a defendant has been found guilty, then the court held there has no further right to use County funds to obtain experts at the time of sentencing or any other subsequent proceeding.

What this means is that if you need an expert witness to assist you, the court will not pay for it. You will need to find a way to retain experts on your own.

When you are facing a serious criminal charge, it is important that you seek the legal assistance of a highly experienced California criminal defense law firm. Wallin and Klarich have been helping people accused of crimes for almost 30 years. You can reach us at 888-280-6839 or go to our website for further information at wklaw.com.

San Diego is the eighth largest city in population in the United States. Located along the Pacific Ocean in the Southwest portion of California, San Diego is 372.1 square miles in size. San Diego’s economy is fueled by defense (home to the largest naval fleet in the world), manufacturing (home to companies such as Qualcomm Incorporated), and tourism (home to numerous points of interest that include the San Diego Zoo and Sea World). With its proximity to beautiful beaches and other relaxing areas, San Diego is a major tourist center in the state of California. With such a vast amount of drivers, residents and tourists alike, commuting throughout San Diego, law enforcement keeps an unyielding eye out for suspects driving under the influence in which those accused of DUI have a right to receive legal representation from a skilled San Diego DUI defense attorney.

When charged with DUI in San Diego, most individuals do not realize just how many consequences they may face. In many cases, a person will have to go to a DMV Hearing to protect driving privileges so that their license is not suspended. If you fail to request a DMV hearing within ten days of your arrest, your driver’s license will automatically be suspended for four months or longer if you’ve had previous DUI offenses.

Continue reading "San Diego DUI and Criminal Defense Attorneys" »

Thoughts by a Wallin & Klarich Criminal Defense Attorney

A Morro Bay pot dispensary owner was sentenced to one year and one day in prison by a federal judge in Los Angeles, according to a published report on latimes.com. Charles Lynch, 47, was prosecuted for illegally distributing marijuana from his Central Coast Compassionate Caregivers facility, despite having the blessing of Morro Bay’s mayor, city attorney and other civic leaders. His California drug crime case has become a symbol, nationwide, of the growing rift between state and federal medical marijuana laws.

Cultivating, using and selling doctor-prescribed marijuana is allowed in California and about a dozen other states, but such activities are banned entirely under federal law. Lynch’s defense attorneys attempted to portray him as a distributor of medicine to the sickly who were seeking relief from chronic illnesses. The prosecution painted him as a common drug dealer, who often sold to underage clientele and perfectly healthy individuals.

The medical marijuana issue is one that is being debated across our nation. As states continue to legislate the matter and make marijuana dispensaries legal and possession and consumption of marijuana for medical purposes also legal, the question of when and how federal drug charges get enforced is being considered.

Continue reading "Pot Dispensary Owner Sentenced to Prison in Los Angeles" »

Commentary On the Conviction by a Wallin & Klarich Homicide Criminal Defense Attorney

Raymond Lee Oyler was sentenced to death on June 6, 2009, according to a published report on the LA Times website. Oyler was convicted of setting the Esparanza blaze in 2006, which claimed the lives of 5 firefighters. Oyler was convicted March 6, 2009 of five counts of first-degree murder in California, 20 counts of arson, and 17 counts of using an incendiary device. A jury at that time called for the death penalty.

In handing down his sentencing, Riverside County Superior Court Judge W. Charles Morgan indicated that Oyler had set out to ‘create havoc’.

"He became more and more proficient. He knew young men and women would put their lives on the line to protect people and property, yet he continued anyway."

Prosecutors say he set a string of fires, as many as 25, throughout the San Gorgonio Pass in the summer of 2006. The fires, sometimes set day after day, steadily grew larger and more difficult to put out.

Homicide is a category of crimes that includes first-degree murder (a premeditated killing), second-degree murder and manslaughter. In California, even a killing that wasn't intentional may be treated as first-degree murder if it happened during an inherently dangerous felony, in this case, arson. This is called the felony-murder rule.

Continue reading "Esparanza Arsonist Sentenced to Death" »

As the largest city in the state of California and the second largest in the United States, Los Angeles is home to almost 3.8 million residents. Los Angeles is a hub of tourism and commerce within its 498.3 square miles and visitors from across the world who choose to become “Angelinos” contribute to its diversity every day. With such a vast amount of drivers commuting throughout the major city of Los Angeles, law enforcement keeps a firm eye on suspects for driving under the influence in which those accused have a right to a fair trial and to receive legal representation from an experienced Los Angeles DUI defense attorney.

When charged with DUI in Los Angeles, most people do not realize just how many consequences they face. First of all, in most cases you will have to go to a DMV Hearing, which must be requested within 10 days of your arrest, to protect your driving privileges so that your license is not suspended. If you fail to request a DMV hearing, your driver’s license will automatically be suspended for four months or longer if this isn’t your first DUI offense.

At Wallin & Klarich, our skilled Los Angeles DUI defense lawyers have been defending the rights of those accused of driving under the influence for many years. We work tirelessly to negotiate a reduced charge so that our clients stay out of jail and can retain their driving privileges to carry on a productive life.

Continue reading "Los Angeles DUI and Criminal Defense Attorney" »

He Will Need an Experienced California Criminal Defense Attorney

A Mexican national was arrested about 200 yards off of Imperial Beach by U.S. Border patrol officials, according to an article by Tony Perry on the June 9th, 2009 Los Angeles Times website.

The man was allegedly trying to smuggle marijuana into the United States via his surfboard, which he was seen on paddling off the shores of Imperial Beach. When agents ordered the surfer to come ashore, he threw a blue duffel bag into the water, the Border Patrol said. That duffel bag later washed ashore where officials discovered that it contained five packages of marijuana with an estimated street value of $74,400.

The marijuana weighed approximately 25 pounds. The man, whose name was not released by officials, admitted to being in the country illegally.

Possession of drugs in California (or drug paraphernalia) can be a felony or a misdemeanor in California, depending on the amount and type of drugs that the individual possesses. Possessing large amounts of drugs, or cultivating or selling drugs, is more likely to be a felony with serious penalties attached. In this instance, you can add federal immigration charges to the mix, in addition to the drug charges.

Continue reading "Man Arrested Trying to Smuggle Marijuana Ashore on Surfboard" »

Wallin & Klarich Criminal Defense Attorneys Compliment the Successful Use of a Government Misconduct Motion

A recent article in the Los Angeles Times describes the story of George Torres, a 52 year old supermarket mogul, who was recently convicted in a massive racketeering case and was awaiting sentencing in federal prison. That sentence had the potential to be a life sentence, but thanks to the discovery of new evidence, and thorough work by his criminal defense attorneys, a federal judge tossed out the most serious conviction against him.

Prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney’s office turned over tape-recorded conversations that contained information that was beneficial to the defense's case. Attorneys for Torres had suspected that there were missing tapes based on testimony and evidence that came out in trial. This led them to file a government misconduct motion that asked that prosecutors search for and turn over any additional recordings. While prosecutors opposed the motion, the judge ordered them to perform the search, which ultimately resulted in the discovery of the recordings.

In light of the tapes, prosecutors told U.S. District Judge Stephen V. Wilson that some of the convictions against Torres should be voided and that those charges would not be refilled. This led to Wilson dismissing a pair of racketeering convictions that included solicitation of murder.

Continue reading "Judge Dismisses Racketeering Convictions" »

Why You Need a Skilled Criminal Defense Attorney

In a previous article, California Penal Code § 243(e)(1), or “simple domestic battery,” was discussed as one of the ways in which a person can be prosecuted for domestic violence in California. There are three ways someone can be prosecuted for domestic violence under California’s domestic violence laws and this article explains the remaining factors.

California Penal Code § 273.5, or “willful infliction of corporal injury”, is a more serious offense, in that it requires the accuser to at least suffer some type of injury. The accuser must sustain a “traumatic condition,” which can actually be as insignificant as a red-mark or scratch. Here, unlike in Penal Code § 243(e)(1), your “fiancé/fiancée” and “people you are or were dating” do not qualify as “intimate partners.” Although this section can be filed as either a misdemeanor or a felony, it would typically only be filed over the Penal Code § 243(e)(1) mentioned above if prosecutors were pursuing the felony allegation.

California Penal Code § 243(d), or “aggravated battery,” is the felony catchall for domestic battery offenses. This section, too, can be filed as either a misdemeanor or a felony, but would typically only be used in a spousal abuse situation if there was a “serious bodily injury” rising to felony level, and the accuser didn’t meet the definition of “intimate partner” in Penal Code § 273.5 above.

Continue reading "California Domestic Violence: What You Need to Know Part 2" »

Why You Need an Experienced Criminal Defense Attorney

There are three ways someone can be prosecuted for domestic violence under California’s domestic violence laws. First, there is Penal Code § 243(e)(1), which is simple domestic battery. Second, there is Penal Code § 273.5, which is defined as willful infliction of corporal injury. Finally, there is Penal Code § 243(d), which is aggravated battery. In addition, if the type of violence doesn’t qualify as “domestic violence,” it can also fit into Penal Code § 242, which is simple battery. Below is a brief description of these differences.

California Penal Code § 243(e)(1), or “simple domestic battery,” is the misdemeanor charge and, therefore, the least serious of these three domestic violence offenses. To be convicted of this offense, all you have to do is intentionally “touch” your “intimate partner” in an offensive or angry manner. That’s it. He/she doesn’t even have to be injured, only offended. Penal Code § 243(e)(1) also has a broad definition of “intimate partners.” Under this definition, your “intimate partner” includes your fiancé or fiancée, your current or former spouse, someone with whom you live or have lived, anyone you are or were dating, or the parent of your child.

More information on the remaining elements of domestic violence charges in California will continue in an additional article.

Continue reading "California Domestic Violence: What You Need to Know Part I" »

San Bernardino, CA has an estimated population of 205,010 as of 2006, making it the 18th largest city in California (based on population). San Bernardino is part of the “Inland Empire” and measures 78.5 square miles in size. The city is roughly 60 miles east of Los Angeles, and is located at the foothills of the San Bernardino Mountains. There are 56,330 household in the city of San Bernardino. Consequently, 48.6% of the population lives below the poverty line. Desperation in times of economic woe can often lead to brazen acts of theft and burglary in San Bernardino which the rights of those accused deserve to be defended by a skilled criminal defense attorney.

San Bernardino’s crime rates are higher than the national average in all major categories, including both violent and property crimes. The city’s burglary rate is 1.53 times the national average, and its theft rate is 1.11 times the national average (car theft is a whopping 2.85 times the national average). With so much crime present in the city, there is a definite need for experienced San Bernardino theft defense lawyers. At Wallin & Klarich, we understand that false accusations, improper arrest procedure, and other matters can lead to an innocent person being branded guilty if they don’t receive quality legal counsel and representation.

At Wallin & Klarich, you can trust that knowledgeable and aggressive lawyers are prepared to examine every detail of your theft or burglary case. Our skilled San Bernardino burglary defense attorneys offer a free consultation of your case, and will fight to ensure that your rights are upheld in a court of law. Please contact us today at 888-749-7428 and we will do everything we can to help clear your name. With over 30 years of criminal defense experience in California, you can trust our firm.

A Corona man could face the death penalty after being charged Tuesday with two counts of murder and one count of attempted murder in the stabbing of his two young children and his wife.

Prosecutors can file a special circumstances allegation of committing multiple murders, which makes someone eligible for the death penalty if the District Attorney chooses to seek capital punishment and you are convicted.

If you or a loved one have been charged with a serious crime like murder, it is imperative that you hire an aggressive, experienced murder and violent crimes defense attorney.

Continue reading "Capital Punishment: You Cannot Proceed Without a Highly Experienced Criminal Defense Attorney" »

Jeffrey MacKanin, a California Department of Justice special agent supervisor who oversaw a Federal and State task force investigating child exploitation crimes, posed on line as a 13-year-old runaway girl named “Hope.” On December 7, 2004 Arthur Crabtree, an attorney who sometimes acted as a “Pro Tem Judge” and was once a city of Glendale Police Officer, contacted “Hope” online. A series of contacts ensued between Crabtree and “Hope” over an approximate six-week period which included various sexual references, that he bought “Hope” a bikini, and that they would take a bubble-bath together. Crabtree ultimately sent “Hope” a bus ticket and arranged for the two to meet at a Los Angeles Greyhound station. Crabtree was arrested by the FBI at the Greyhound station after a special agent observed him approaching at least three different female teenagers. Crabtree was charged and eventually convicted in the Superior Court of Los Angeles County for, among other things, felony attempted lewd act upon a child under 14 stemming from his actions toward “Hope.”Crabtree appealed his conviction.

The essence of Crabtree’s argument on appeal of the attempted lewd act conviction was that his acts amounted to only preparation for committing a lewd act on “Hope” and his acts were insufficient to prove he attempted to commit a lewd act. Crabtree argued that the facts clearly showed that he had not reached the stage where the preparation had ended and the crime had begun, so as to make the attempt complete. Crabtree did not contest the fact that he drove to the bus station where he intended to meet “Hope” and that law enforcement found, among other things, condoms, Viagra, a bikini, and bubble bath in his trunk. However, he did argue that he was obviously not going to have sex with “Hope” in a bus depot but would have taken her to a hotel, and there were no hotel reservations made or any other evidence to support that his actions had moved form preparation to commit the crime to an attempt to commit a crime.

Continue reading "Attempted Lewd Act Conviction Did Not Require Police to Wait Until Defendant Actually Enter a Hotel Room With a Minor" »

Huntington Beach, California is a coastal city located in Orange County. With a total area of 31.6 square miles, Huntington Beach, or “Surf City” as it’s popularly referred to as, houses a population just shy of 190,000 (as of the 2000 United States census). Known for its beautiful beaches and preserved wetlands, Huntington Beach plays host to countless beach-goers and tourists each year. In addition, numerous surfing outfits hold their events in Huntington Beach each year. Like any major city that is home to many and draws multiple visitors throughout the year, Huntington Beach has cases of theft and burglary in which the rights of the accused deserve to be defended.

Although crime rates in Huntington Beach are generally half those of the national average, the experienced Huntington Beach burglary defense lawyers at Wallin & Klarich have successfully provided legal counsel and representation to many clients. While violent crimes are not common in the city, property crimes are more prevalent (though still merely 48% of the national average). Property crime is often a problem in areas visited by tourists, and Huntington Beach is no exception. For this reason, it is important to have skilled criminal defense attorneys in the area that can sort through the evidence and help prevent the innocent from experiencing unwarranted punishment for crimes that they didn’t commit in the first place.

Wallin & Klarich has more than 30 years of experience as criminal defense attorneys in California. Our skilled Huntington Beach theft defense attorneys can help assist you with every aspect of your case, and will ensure that your rights are upheld in every possible way. Please contact us today for a confidential evaluation of your case, and place yourself on the road to restoring your good name. Contact us today and visit our website at www.wklaw.com.

What an Experienced Criminal Defense Attorney Can Do for You

An officer must see an objective violation of the law, or have reasonable suspicion that a crime is about to occur or has occurred, before an officer may detain an individual. Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806, 116 S. Ct. 1769, 135 L. Ed. 2d 89 (1996). In Whren, the United States’ Supreme Court held that a police officer’s subjective intentions do not defeat the lawfulness of a detention based upon probable cause to believe that a motorist has violated a traffic code.

An officer’s subjective opinion that an individual’s driving is unusual, does not justify a detention in the absence of objective probable cause that there was a violation of the vehicle code. E.g. Taylor v. Department of Motor Vehicles, (1995) 36 Cal. App. 4th 812, 42 Cal. Rptr. 2d 758. In Taylor, the Court held that the actions of a seventeen-year-old who was driving a pickup truck at midnight on a Friday, who cut sharply behind a police officer while yelling from the vehicle, did not provide objective justification for a detention.

The Court noted that a sharp but entirely legal turn and a yell from within a vehicle do not indicate that the driver is under the influence.

Continue reading "Unlawful for Officer to Arrest without Probable Cause to Detain a Driver" »

Criminal Defense Attorney Precluded from Asking Alleged Victim about Prior Statements about Sexual Matters

On June 16, 2009 the 9th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals issued a critical ruling that anyone who is facing child molestation charges must be familiar with if they are going to be able to properly defend themselves from these serious charges.

The court in Holley vs. Yarborough ruled that the accused’s criminal defense attorney should have been allowed to question the alleged victim as to statements that the alleged victim had made to other people in regard to “sexual matter,” and of her accusing other people of making sexual advances toward her.

The defense attorney argued that this evidence could indicate that the alleged victim had a tendency to fabricate sexual abuse allegations. In addition the accused’s lawyer argued that this information could explain to the jury that the alleged victim had knowledge about sexual matters from sources other than her alleged conduct with the defendant.

However, the trial judge denied his request. The defendant was found guilty and sentenced to prison. The defendant appealed to the California Court of Appeals and his appeal was rejected. He then attempted to have the California Supreme Court reverse his conviction. They declined. This meant the accused had to turn to the federal courts for possible relief. This was a very wise decision. The Federal Court of Appeals agreed with his legal position and has reversed his conviction entitling him to a new trial. At the new trial attained due to the California appeal, he will be able to introduce this critical evidence which likely will result in a different jury verdict.

Continue reading "Federal Court of Appeals Reverses Child Molest Conviction " »

When a person is charged with a crime, the first formal legal process is the arraignment. The arraignment is a hearing before a judge where several important things occur. If a person is in custody, the arraignment must occur within two to three days. Otherwise, arraignment is usually set for a date several weeks in the future.

There are several purposes of an arraignment. First, the defendant is formally read the charges he or she is facing. Next, the defendant is informed of his or her rights. For misdemeanor and felony crimes in California, these include a right to a jury trial, a right to present evidence, a right to confront adverse witnesses, and, if any jail time is a possibility, a right to an attorney. To be appointed a Public Defender, a defendant must meet certain income criteria. Depending on your income level and assets, the court may or may not decide that you qualify for the services of the Public Defender. If the court determines you do not qualify, generally you will be allowed to continue the arraignment in order to obtain a private attorney.

In a misdemeanor case, even if you do qualify for a Public Defender, it is often wise to obtain the services of a private attorney, because they may appear at the arraignment (and several other proceedings) without your presence. A great benefit of retaining private counsel is the simple fact that you do not have to miss work and spend all morning in a courtroom waiting to be called. This is true in some proceedings in felony cases as well, although courts vary in their requirements for the presence of the defendant.

Continue reading "Stages of the Criminal Process: Arraignment" »

Why You Need to Protect Yourself Even After Disposition by Hiring an Experienced Domestic Violence Attorney

If you are facing California criminal charges of domestic violence, it is important to know that there is more to your case than simply the sentence imposed by the court. After a finding of guilty or no contest, the court may then impose additional restitution in an effort to compensate the victim for his or her damages.

A restitution hearing is a type of mini-trial designed to restore the victim’s economic losses he or she suffered due to the defendant’s crime. This can include:

• medical expenses, including mental health and counseling expenses;


• the value of stolen or damaged property;


• lost wages and profits, including wages lost due to injuries suffered from the crime, testifying in court, and attending trial.


• relocation and security expenses;


• investigative expenses incurred by the victim related to the criminal case; and


• attorney’s fees incurred by the victim.

Further, an interest of ten percent can accrue on all orders of restitution made by the court.

Continue reading "Domestic Violence and Victim Restitution" »

If you have been convicted of a crime, the stigma associated with the conviction is something that can haunt you for the rest of your life. Having to check “yes” on a job application when asked if you have ever been convicted of a crime is often enough to cost you the job, especially in these tough economic times. However, if you were convicted of a misdemeanor and have stayed out of trouble since then, it is actually relatively easy to have that record “expunged.”

It is important to understand what an expungement in California entails. Most importantly, after a motion for expungement under CA Penal Code 1203.4 is granted, you may legally check “no” when asked by private employers if you have ever been convicted of a crime. When a criminal conviction is expunged, the law no longer considers you as having been convicted of the offense.

However, it is also important to realize what an expungement does not do. It does not relieve you of your duty to disclose the conviction when you are applying with government employers or government licensing applications. In that situation you may state “Yes – conviction dismissed.” In California, government employers and licensing agencies (except for police agencies and concessionaire licensing boards), will treat you the same as if you had never been convicted of the crime.

In addition, a California expungement does not erase the conviction for several other purposes. An expunged criminal conviction can still be used to increase your punishment in future criminal cases. If your conviction prevented you from owning a gun, possessing a driver’s license, or holding a public office, an expungement will not re-instate those privileges.

Continue reading "What it Means to “Expunge” a Criminal Record" »

Glendale, California is part of Los Angles County and located at the eastern end of the San Fernando Valley. Glendale has a population of 207,303 as of January 1, 2009, and is the third largest city in Los Angeles County. The city spans 30.7 square miles and it is estimated that Glendale has a population density of 6,770.6 people per square mile. As with any major city, Glendale has its fair share of theft and burglary crimes in which those accused deserve to have a fair trial and quality legal representation from an experienced Glendale theft defense lawyer who will ensure that constitutional rights were not violated during arrest or investigation proceedings.

Though incidents of theft and burglary in Glendale have consistently decreased over the years, with instances of property crime, for example, dropping nearly 15% (dropping from 1,719 to 1,470 acts of reported property crime in a one year period), there is still a definite need for criminal defense attorneys in the Glendale area. At Wallin & Klarich, we understand that mishaps occur and that guilt is not always attributed to the right person. Our attorneys are dedicated to defending the rights of those accused of Glendale theft and burglary under the law and will use our skills and resources to help you with your case.

Wrongful accusation can devastate a young life, and the attorneys at Wallin & Klarich understand this. Our skilled Glendale burglary defense attorneys have years of experience defending those accused or criminal offenses, especially property crime. Please call our knowledgeable lawyers for a consultation, and let us help you get your life back on track. Contact us 24/7 at 888-280-6839.

The California Court of Appeal recently decided In re H.H. (2009 DJDAR 7935), a case involving a minor who was illegally searched after being pulled over for riding a bicycle without proper lighting equipment. When the minor was pulled over he was asked to “step from the bicycle” at which time he took off the backpack he was wearing and said “I am not on probation” and refused to give consent to search his person or his backpack. The officer involved wondered why the minor would say that and used it as a basis for a pat down search. The officer later said that he became concerned that the minor may have a weapon on his person.

It turns out that the minor did have a concealed weapon—a revolver—but that the officer did not have reasonable grounds to perform the pat down search. The trial court refused to grant the minor’s motion to suppress the revolver evidence, and the minor appealed. On appeal, the court held that refusal to consent does not create reasonable suspicion to pat search or probable cause to search. Accordingly, the appeals court reversed the lower court’s denial of the minor’s motion to suppress and remanded for further proceedings.

In its reasoning, the appeals court held that a protective pat down search for weapons is permissible if the officer can point to specific and articulable facts that lead him to believe that he is dealing with an armed and dangerous individual—he need not be absolutely certain that the individual is armed. However, the court stressed that the purpose of the limited search is not to discover evidence of crime, but to allow the officer to pursue his investigation without fear of violence.

Continue reading "Know Your Rights: Even Minors Are Protected From the Tyranny of Illegal Searches" »

Why You Need the Assistance of a Criminal Defense Law Firm

Often, a defendant is charged with multiple crimes stemming out of the same incident. For example, a person involved in a bar fight may be charged with both disturbing the peace and assault in California. While both charges are based on the same course of conduct, it is still possible to be found guilty of violating both laws.

In California, the crime of simple assault carries a maximum of six months of jail time while the crime of disturbing the peace carries a maximum of 90 days jail time. However, it is important to realize that while multiple convictions based on a single act or course of conduct are allowed, multiple punishments are barred. This means that a defendant found guilty of both assault and disturbing the peace will only be exposed to the higher of the maximum punishments, in this case, six months in jail for the assault conviction. Other sentences for convictions from the same act must be stayed.

The key to understanding the limit on multiple punishments is whether the course of conduct was in fact an indivisible single transaction. This will depend on the actor’s intent and objective. In the case of the bar patron starting a fight, if the court determines that his intent was to fight an individual, while he can be convicted of the two crimes, he cannot be punished for both.

Continue reading "California Sentencing Laws for Multiple Convictions Can Be Complicated" »

Chula Vista, California is located in southern San Diego County. The city is the second largest in San Diego County according to population, and the 14th largest statewide in California (also in terms of population numbers). Chula Vista is 51.2 square miles in size, and houses a population of about 217,478 residents. Since the year 2000, Chula Vista’s population has grown by over 20%.

Chula Vista’s economy is very much tied to that of the rest of the San Diego area, which draws a huge amount of tourism. With such large numbers of people visiting and passing through the area, in addition to those who call Chula Vista home, there is an increased chance in the number of theft and burglary crimes that will be committed.

At Wallin & Klarich, our skilled Chula Vista theft defense attorneys won’t let confusion and false accusation lead to an innocent person being punished for a crime they didn’t commit. Though the crime rate in Chula Vista is below the national average (316.5 occurrences of crime per 100,000 residents vs. the national average of 320.9 per 100,000 persons), there is still a definite need for criminal defense attorneys in Chula Vista.

Our criminal defense attorneys at Wallin & Klarich have years of experience defending those accused of burglary and theft crimes in the Chula Vista area, and are prepared to handle every aspect of your case. Our aggressive Chula Vista burglary defense lawyers will examine the circumstances of your arrest, and will help prove that you are innocent. Please call us today for a case evaluation at 888-280-6839 or visit www.wklaw.com for more information.

Recently in Arizona v. Gant, United States Supreme Court ruled that it was not proper for officers to have the authority to automatically search the car of a person who is stopped over a traffic infraction. The court held that in order to justify a search, the police must either reasonably fear that the arrestee might have access to a weapon in the car or have a reasonable prospect of finding evidence of the crime that the driver committed.

This ruling by the Supreme Court has been welcomed by proponents of individual liberty and privacy interests. However, the ruling has also highlighted what many consider overreaching and potentially unchecked power given to law enforcement. Although the police may not search a car incident to the arrest of a driver who commits a traffic violation, they could legally do so by impounding the vehicle. The courts have held that all evidence discovered by law enforcement during a routine inventory of an impounded vehicle, may be used against the owner.

Proponents of individual liberty and personal privacy rights argue that officers can maneuver around the Supreme Court ruling by simply arresting the driver, conducting a full body search, impounding the vehicle, and inventorying its contents. However, the recent ruling by the Supreme Court in Gant may indicate the courts have begun to question the broad search power given to law enforcement.

Continue reading "United States Supreme Court Rules that Police May Not Automatically Search the Car of Anyone They Pull Over for a Traffic Infraction" »

The Office of the Attorney General has a page on its website that allows those individuals who may be listed on the Child Abuse Central Index (CACI) to check their ‘list status.’ The page was added to the site to adhere to California Penal Code section 11170, which in pertinent part, explains that:

(f) (1) Any person may determine if he or she is listed in the Child Abuse Central Index by making a request in writing to the Department of Justice.

There are two ways that an individual can check to see if they are listed on the CACI. The first involves filling out a form called the: California Department of Justice Child Abuse Central Index Self Inquiry Request form. Once completed, this form is mailed to the Department of Justice.

The second way an individual can find out if they are on the CACI is to send a brief notarized letter asking if their name is in the Child Abuse Central Index (CACI). The letter must include:

• All the names they have used


• Date of birth


• Identifying Numbers


• Current Address


• Previous California Residences

Continue reading "Child Abuse Central Index – Self Inquiry" »

An article in the Los Angeles Times discusses recent L.A. Sheriff’s statistics that show crime in Los Angeles and across Southern California has reduced in recent months. The reduction comes despite an economic downturn which has resulted in an unemployment rate in double digits, an imploded housing market, and the closing of countless businesses.

The decline flies in the face of predictions made by many crime experts that the region would probably experience substantial increases in property-related crimes and some types of violence as more people fell into financial hardship. Quite the opposite has happened, the article explains. Property crimes, such as burglary and auto theft, were down 6.4% over the same period last year, while violent crimes, including homicides and rapes, were down 4.9%. The Sheriff's Department reported a 10% drop in serious violent and property crimes in the areas it patrols.

It can be argued that during these times of financial hardships, that individuals are spending more time at home in an attempt to save what little income they have for important things like bills and food. The trend of people moving back with family members and parents to save on rent also has an impact on how often and when certain individuals go out. As these individuals move back to the nest, there propensity to get into trouble lessens.

Continue reading "Crime Down In Los Angeles and Other Parts of California" »

Masoud Bamdad, 55, was convicted of 13 counts of illegal drug distribution and faces a maximum sentence of more than 300 years in prison for improperly prescribing powerful painkillers to his drug-addicted patients and undercover DEA agents.

Prosecutors portrayed Bamdad as little more than a common drug dealer. Customers in his offices would pay him $140 or more for prescriptions to drugs like oxycodone. Authorities said he admitted receiving about $30,000 a week in cash -- or $1.5 million a year -- for prescriptions given out at his clinic in San Fernando.

Prescription drug abuse has become a serious problem in this country. Distribution and possession of these drugs without a prescription has become a case that the district attorney’s office will commonly pursue. The penalties, as is evidenced by the California drug crime example in this article, can be very serious.

Continue reading "San Fernando Valley Doctor Convicted Of Selling Painkillers" »

A recent article in the Los Angeles Times discusses a clinic at Stanford Law School that focuses entirely on convicts who are serving extended sentences because of California’s Three Strikes Law. The students at this law clinic are devoting their time and effort to reversing what they view as miscarriages of justice under the California Law.

Since September, the Stanford Criminal Defense Clinic, has persuaded judges to lessen the sentences of four prisoners, three of which have been released so far, having already served their reduced prison terms, which ranged from six to 10 years.

Other innocence projects have existed in the past. They offer opportunities for those individuals who claim to be innocent of the crimes they are convicted of an opportunity to have an appeal heard in court. Rather than defending those who claim to be innocent, the Stanford students are advocating for prisoners guilty of what they view as relatively minor offenses and raising the question of how much prison time is too much.

While the work that organizations like the Stanford Criminal Defense Clinic offers three-strike offenders an opportunity to get out of jail, it certainly is the hard way to go about getting a court of law to lessen your sentence.

Continue reading "Law Students Help Free Three-Strike Offenders" »

With an estimated population of 311,575 in 2008, Riverside, California is the largest city in the Inland Empire region of California, and the 12th largest city statewide. The United States Census Bureau reports that Riverside has a total area of 98.4 square miles, with a population density of 3,267.2 people per square mile. The University of California at Riverside and the Riverside Unified School District employ the largest number of people in the city. Similar to many large cities, Riverside experiences its share of burglary and theft crimes in which those accused deserve a fair trial and legal counsel from an experienced Riverside criminal defense lawyer.

The cost of living in Riverside, California is low in comparison to the rest of Southern California. Crime rates, particularly those involving car-theft, are well above the national average. The presence of street gangs with large membership numbers exasperates the crime problem, and creates confusion among residents as to who is and isn’t a gang member. At Wallin & Klarich, we understand that innocent people can often be blamed for wrongdoing, which creates a definite need for skilled theft attorneys in Riverside.

At Wallin & Klarich, our knowledgeable attorneys are quite familiar with wrongful accusation, and have the experience to help clear your name. If you or a loved one has been accused of a theft or burglary crime in Riverside, please don’t hesitate to contact the criminal defense lawyers at Wallin & Klarich. Restoring your good name is our number one priority, and finding you innocent of criminal charges is the first step in doing so. Call us today for a consultation of your case at 888-280-6839 or visit www.wklaw.com for more information.

The website thecalifornian.com reported in a story on May 29, 2009 that Phil Spector, 69, has been sentenced to 19 years to life for the murder of actress Lana Clarkson, 40, nearly six years after he shot her. Clarkson was found shot through the mouth in the famous music producer’s mansion in Alhambra. Spector displayed no emotion as Superior Court Judge Larry Paul Fidler laid out his sentence of 15 years to life for second degree murder in California, and an additional four years for personal use of a gun.

Before Judge Fidler’s sentencing, Clarkson’s mother, Donna, made a short statement, recounting her daughter’s exceptional traits, sense of humor, intellect, and commitment to her craft of acting.

She said, “I’m very proud of Lana, proud to be her mother. No one should suffer the loss of a child.”

These kinds of cases can be extremely tough for both sides of the family. Homicide charges carry the most severe jail time in California and can also include heavy fines. In fact, recent U.S. laws have been passed that will increase the mandatory minimum sentences that will apply to people who are convicted of committing certain violent crimes. If you have been arrested for carrying out a violent crime in Los Angeles, you may be looking at a prison term of 25 years to life. Using a firearm to commit murder or any other felony can increase the sentence by 3 to 10 years.

Continue reading "19 Years to Life for “Wall of Sound” Producer: He Will Need an Experienced Criminal Defense and Appellate Attorney" »

The website seattlepi.com reported in an article on May 28, 2009 that prosecutors will be calling Rihanna, 21, as one of the witnesses at a preliminary hearing against R & B singer Chris Brown, 19, who faces assault charges. Rihanna’s lawyer, Daonald Etra, told new reporters that prosecutors have informed him that Rihanna, whose real name is Robyn Rihanna Fenty, will be receiving a subpoena to testify in June. The preliminary hearing will center on whether there is enough evidence to go on with the case against Brown. Etra stated that Rihanna will obey the order and would be the first time she appears in court. Rihanna will be subject to cross-examination by Brown’s lawyer, Mark Geragos. Police investigators and other potential witnesses have not been named but will likely be included.

Brown faces criminal assault and criminal threat charges for allegedly hitting and choking Rihanna in February. The couple was planned to appear at the Grammy’s just hours before the incident.

If you or a loved one is being charged with a violent assault charge in Los Angeles you will need an experienced lawyer who knows the law and will be aggressive in court defending your freedom.

Continue reading "Chris Brown to Face Rihanna In Court: He’ll Be Sure to Have an Experienced Criminal Defense Attorney" »