Southern California Defense Blog

Why Having an Experienced Criminal Defense Attorney Can Make a Difference

A U.S. District Judge recently ruled that supermarket mogul George Torres did not get a fair trial after it was discovered that the federal prosecutors failed to provide the defense with evidence that harmed the credibility of two key witnesses. This failure to disclose led to the dismissal of racketeering and other charges that were based on the testimony.

The experienced criminal defense attorney argued that since some of the charges were thrown out, they all should be thrown out—the judge agreed.

In addition to the prosecution’s failure to disclose, Torres’ defense attorney was also able to expose Los Angeles Police Department Detective Greg Kading for threatening witnesses and promising money and leniency in exchange for the tainted testimony. Torres was eventually convicted by jury, despite the allegations; but is now on his way to freedom thanks to his diligent criminal defense.

Continue reading "U.S. Attorney Misconduct Leads to Another Overturned Conviction" »

The Secret Service is investigating an online survey that asked whether people thought President Obama should be assassinated. The poll was quickly taken off of the popular social networking site, Facebook, after company officials were alerted to its existence. The Associated Press reports that the poll asked questions like “Should Obama be killed? No, Maybe, Yes and Yes if he cuts my health care.

Facebook officials say that they are working with the Secret Service, but have yet to receive specific details of their investigation. The Secret Service has stated that it will take the appropriate investigative steps.

Even though this poll may have been set up as a joke, it does not take away from its criminal implications. Threats against others are criminal no matter who they are made against, much less the President of the United States. People often make statements like these thinking that it is their free speech right under the First Amendment, only to find out later that they are under criminal investigation.

Continue reading "Facebook Poll on Assassination of President Leads to Criminal Investigations: Why It's Never Too Early to Hire an Attorney " »

The Los Angles County Sheriff’s department announced this week that the overall crime rate in Los Angeles County has dropped in 2009! According to its statistics, property crimes dropped 11% compared to 2008. Moreover, homicides in Los Angeles County dropped 23.5% compared to 2008, the biggest drop in any category.

All this comes amidst an extremely high unemployment rate throughout Los Angeles County, of which was at 12.3% in August of this year. Los Angles County Sheriff Lee Baca credits this drop in crime to maintaining a high amount of police officers and Sheriff Deputies patrolling the streets of Los Angles County, even as the State continues to be financially strapped.

It will definitely be interesting to see if this drop in crime in Los Angeles County continues.

Continue reading "Crime Down in Los Angeles" »

As the largest city in California and the second largest in the U.S., Los Angeles has much to offer its residents and the hundreds of tourists who visit throughout the entire year. Also known as the “City of Angels”, Los Angeles had an estimated population in July 2008 of 3,833,995 occupying its 498.3 square miles. It’s no wonder then that the greater Los Angeles metropolitan area amounts to almost 12.9 million inhabitants. As the hot-spot of multiple major corporations, entertainment and sports venues, and with access to many vital highways, arrests are often made for reckless driving in Los Angeles which can include drunk driving charges.

Reckless driving is a misdemeanor offense, but its consequences should not be underestimated. Considering that reckless driving charges in Los Angeles can result in stiff penalties, such as a fine of $145 to $1,000, imprisonment for 5 to 90 days, or both, it may be in your best interest to seek legal assistance from an experienced Los Angeles reckless driving defense attorney. If an officer determines that you have driven a vehicle “in willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property”, as defined by California Vehicle Code 23103, then you may be charged with reckless driving.

Similar to a drunk driving conviction, a reckless driving conviction can result in the DMV adding points to your driver’s license. If you have been charged with reckless driving or with DUI, contact the skilled Southern California criminal defense lawyers at Wallin and Klarich today. We have been defending the rights of those facing criminal charges in California for over 30 years, lending us the knowledge and resources to reach a successful outcome in any criminal case. Call Wallin and Klarich today at 888-280-6839 for a case evaluation.

Have you ever been convicted of a Felony, or of a Misdemeanor Sex offense in California? Are you embarrassed by your record and constantly reminded of your mistakes? Do you wish to have your rights restored? Such as being able to serve on a jury, or being employed as a state parole officer or as a county probation officer? Do you want to be able to own or possess a firearm? If so, a Governor’s Pardon is what you are looking for.

A California Governor's pardon is an honor that is granted to those who have demonstrated exemplary behavior following a felony conviction. If after your conviction you have led a useful, productive, and law-abiding life, then you could be granted a Governor’s Pardon.

To apply for a Governor’s Pardon, you must be off probation or parole for at least 10 years before applying for a pardon, and you have not had any further criminal activity during those 10 years. You do not need to reside in California to apply for a Governor’s Pardon.

Continue reading "Getting a Governor's Pardon, Getting Your Life Back!" »

Why You Need an Experienced Criminal Defense Lawyer on Your Side

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently overturned a first degree murder conviction in US v. Begay (2009 DJDAR 7955). Begay was convicted of two counts of first degree murder and two counts of using a firearm during a crime of violence. The District Court imposed mandatory concurrent life sentences for each murder conviction as well as 35 years for the firearm convictions. However, the Ninth Circuit overturned the first degree murder convictions on the ground that the government failed to introduce evidence sufficient to show premeditation—an essential element of first degree murder.

The Begay court outlined premeditation as requiring a showing that the defendant had the time to reflect on the decision to commit murder, that he in fact did reflect on that decision, and that he committed the murder with a “cool mind” after having engaged in such reflection. The Begay court further explained that the element of premeditation is typically established through three categories of evidence: how and what the defendant did prior to the actual killing; the defendant’s prior relationship and conduct with the victim; and facts about the nature of the killing.

With the above three categories in mind, the court systematically spoiled the government’s trial court arguments. Citing to the record, the Begay court stated that the government “doesn’t know what that reason [for the crimes] is…” The court further stated that the record contains no hint of information from which any person could determine why theses murders occurred. Similarly, the court referenced the government’s assertion that “there was no evidence of any prior connection between the defendant and the victims” and that, while the evidence of motive or prior relationship between the defendant and the victim may not be necessary to show premeditation, the lack of such evidence certainly does not support a finding that premeditation exists.

The Begay court was especially critical of the government’s assertion that the defendant’s possession of a weapon constituted the necessary proof of premeditation. “The mere fact that an individual has in his possession a weapon does not support premeditation if the weapon is one that he routinely uses for lawful, non-violent purposes.” In this case, the record reflected that Begay routinely used the gun for recreational purposes. The court held that possession of the firearm alone is not enough to support premeditation.

Perhaps even more surprising was the Begay court’s declaration that despite the defendant being “pretty drunk” at the time of the shooting, his practice and experience with the weapon used during the shooting, and the fact that he was only three to four feet away from the victim when firing, the defendant missed a number of times—suggesting agitation, excitement, or frenzy, not the “cool mind” of premeditation. Adding more, the court stated that the violence of multiple wounds, while more than ample to show an intent to kill, cannot by itself support an inference of a calmly calculated plan to kill. The court concluded that any determination as to premeditation would necessarily be speculative in nature.

Continue reading "Defendant Convicted of First Degree Murder Has Sentence Overturned Based on Insufficient Evidence" »

On March 7, 2006, Tony Wagner and his friend, Scott lamb, went into a residence occupied by Jerry Jackson in the city of Hemet, California, which is located in Riverside County. They were accompanied by Jackson’s ex-girlfriend, Celeste Trzepacz, who wanted to get her dog back form Jackson. After an exchange of words, Lamb and Jackson got into a fistfight. According to Trzepacz, prior to the fight, Lamb removed a handgun from his waistband and handed it to Wagner. Trzepacz went inside the residence and, while inside, she heard three gunshots. When she came back out of the house she saw that Jackson had been shot and was on the ground. He had gunshot wounds to both knees. Trzepack believed that Wagner was still holding the gun. Wagner was interviewed by the police and he initially denied being present. He eventually told police that he shot Jackson but claimed that Jackson was coming toward him.

On March 23, 2006, Wagner was charged by the Riverside County District Attorney’s office with one count of assault with a semiautomatic firearm along with additional allegations and enhancements alleging that he personally used the firearm and that he inflicted great bodily injury. Mr. Wagner’s case slowly crept through the criminal justice system in Riverside and it was finally set for trial the day before the Defendant’s constitutional speedy trial rights would have been violated. On that day the trial court Judge, Helios Hernandez, concluded that there were no available courtrooms in all of Riverside County to hear Mr. Wagner’s case and the case was dismissed the following day despite strenuous objections from the District Attorney’s office. The District Attorney’s office then appealed the decision to dismiss the case.

On appeal, the District Attorney’s office argued that the Trial Court erred by dismissing the case because it improperly failed to give priority to this case over other civil cases in its effort to locate a courtroom. The DA also argued that the court erred by failing to conclude that court congestion and mismanagement constituted good cause to continue the case.

Continue reading "Serious Criminal Case Dismissed in Riverside County Due to Lack of Courtrooms" »

Connie Keel was charged with first-degree murder for participating as an aider and abettor in the robbery of a liquor store that resulted in the death of the store clerk. Keel was convicted of murder in California at her 1981 trial, even though she was never accused of killing anyone with her own hands. To this day, Keel claims that she had no idea that her husband and cousin intended to rob the liquor store. However, under California’s Felony Murder Rule, prosecutors successfully charged her with first-degree murder. The penalty for first-degree murder is 25 years to life.

The Felony Murder Rule allows prosecutors to charge a defendant with first degree murder, if any homicide is committed during the course of specified felonies—such as robbery, rape, and burglary. An aider and abettor is anyone who helps the principal offender commit the crime. Keel is alleged to have waited in the getaway car while her husband and cousin robbed, and ultimately shot and killed the liquor store clerk.

The Felony Murder Rule is inscribed in California Penal Code Section 189. It states in pertinent part that “all murder… which is committed in the perpetration of, or attempt to perpetrate, arson, rape, carjacking, robbery, burglary, mayhem, kidnapping…, is murder of the first degree.” California also recognizes the offense of second-degree murder, punishable by sentences of 15 years to life, for homicides committed during the course of other felonies not referred to in the statute but deemed “inherently dangerous to human life.”

Continue reading "Under California's Felony Murder Rule, an Unarmed, First-Time Offender Served 29 Years in Prison for Waiting in a Getaway Car During a Robbery" »

The last two days, we have been blogging on WIT Court. But I am sure most readers are wondering; what is the benefit of being in this program anyway?

A participant is accepted into WIT Court program after pleading guilty to a non-violent criminal offense. The defendant is then sentenced to WIT court. This means that rather initially serving a sentencing in county jail or state prison, the defendant is treated with psychiatric medicine, regular court appearances and counseling through the WIT Court Program.

If the defendant successfully completes treatment then the conviction is withdrawn. But if the defendant does not successfully complete treatment then the initial sentence is reinstated.

It goes without saying that having a conviction withdrawn would be a huge relief to any person. However, such great news is not without a slight downside. The conviction remains on the participant’s record for strike purposes and must be reported if seeking government employment.

There are numerous other benefits as well. As stated in the first blog, the participants in WIT Court are provided with mental health counseling, psychiatric services, drug and alcohol abuse counseling, residential treatment, safe housing, family counseling and peer mentoring. WIT Court Participants are also assisted in accessing medical services, employment counseling, job training and placement, government benefits, and housing.

Continue reading "More on WIT Court - Once Accepted into WIT Court, What Are the Benefits?" »

As Ventura County’s third biggest city, Simi Valley had an estimated population of 126,300 in August 2009. Located in Southern California, Simi Valley is considered to be quite hidden by hills and mountains, but that doesn’t stop new inhabitants from joining the community. In its span of about 42 square miles, transportation to and from Simi Valley is available through Highways 118, 23, 101 and Interstates 5, 405, and 210. Although Simi Valley is considered to be a safe community, incidents of DUI arrests do occur in which those facing such charges have the right to seek help from an experienced Simi Valley DUI attorney.

Being charged with a DUI in Simi Valley presents stern obstacles that no one ever anticipates they will face. Making sure that your constitutional rights are protected is essential in accordance with having an experienced attorney who has handled hundreds of DUI cases investigate the accuracy of tests that were conducted to determine your level of intoxication, among many other factors. The lawyers at Wallin & Klarich have the skills and resources necessary to assist you with your DUI case.

At Wallin & Klarich, our skilled Simi Valley criminal defense lawyers have the legal knowledge and resources to handle a wide-range of cases relating to DUI, juvenile offenses, theft crimes, violent crimes, sex offenses, and much more. With over 30 years devoted to aggressively defending the rights of those accused of criminal offenses in California, our attorneys are prepared to assist you in all the various ways that we can. Call Wallin & Klarich today for a case evaluation at 888-280-6839.

"WIT" Court or "Whatever it Takes Court" is a collaborative court program that seeks to aid those who are mentally ill and on the verge of homelessness to stabilize their life through treating the mental illness.

As mentioned in yesterday’s post, to be eligible for the program the defendant must have (1 )a “serious and persistent” mental health disorders, (2) must be homeless or on the verge of homelessness and (3) must have “non-violent” charges.

But what makes a person have a serious and persistent mental health disorder? And was does being on the verge of homelessness require?

A “Serious and Persistent” mental health disorder is determined by the DSM or “Diagnostic and Statistic Manual of Mental Disorders” that classifies mental disorders into severity. This is a national manual published by the American Psychiatric Association. This manual classifies mental disorders into axis groups. Axis I is the most severe, Axis II less severe and so forth.

The court considers all “Axis I” diagnoses to be serious and persistent and thus eligible for WIT Court, however there is some indication that the court, with persuasive counsel would allow in Axis II individuals as well. Axis I diagnoses includes, a diagnosis of schizophrenia, bi-polar disorder, or major depressive disorder.

To get into this program, the potential participant must not only have a severe mental disorder, but also be on the verge of homelessness. This requires that the defendant be out on his or her own or is about to be kicked out of his or her home because of his mental defect. There is no clear cut definition in the law for the “verge of homelessness.” The lack of a well defined term allows a knowledgeable and skilled Orange County criminal defense attorney the ability to argue on behalf of his or her client to persuade the court to allow the potential participant in the WIT Court Program.

Continue reading "More on WIT Court - How You or Your Loved One Can Get Accepted into this Program" »

The city of Van Nuys occupies the center of the San Fernando Valley region of Los Angeles. Its main street, Van Nuys Boulevard, is known for its vast array of car dealerships. The TV show Beverly Hills 90210 was filmed on a set in Van Nuys. The city had an estimated population in 2000 of 136,443 people. Given its close proximity to Los Angeles, Van Nuys is susceptible to its share of congested roads, which makes law enforcement keep a sharp eye out for drunk driving, especially within close proximity to bars and restaurants.

At Wallin & Klarich, we understand that being arrested for DUI in Van Nuys can be a confusing and overwhelming experience. Fortunately, you have the right to seek legal guidance and representation from a skilled Van Nuys DUI defense lawyer who can ensure that your rights are protected under the law. According to the California Department of Motor Vehicles, there was a total of 30,783 alcohol involved injuries in the state of California in 2007, and 1,489 alcohol involved fatalities, all occurring on California roads and highways. For the residents of Van Nuys, skilled DUI attorneys are definitely a necessity, particularly since DUI charges can be highly complex.

The Van Nuys criminal defense attorneys at Wallin & Klarich have years of experience handling cases relating to criminal matters, especially those involving DUI. Don’t hesitate to contact us today in the event that you are charged with a DUI offense, and our aggressive and knowledgeable lawyers will examine the circumstances of your case in order to mount the best possible defense. Contact Wallin & Klarich today by calling 888-280-6839 for a case evaluation.

An Experienced Criminal Defense Lawyer is Knowledgeable About All Rehabilitative Court Programs

Whatever it Takes or WIT Court is a collaborative court program similar to DUI or Drug Court in Orange County. However, unlike DUI or Drug Court, WIT is a judicial construct, not a legislative one. This means that the requirements to enter the program, make it through the program and graduate are created by the judge, not the California legislature.

WIT Court is funded through Proposition 63, The Mental Health Services Act passed in November of 2004 (codified in section 5840 of the Welfare and Institutions code). To be eligible for the program the defendant must have a (1) “serious and persistent” mental health disorders, (2) must be homeless or on the verge of homelessness and (3) must have “non-violent” charges.

In addition to the three requirements just mentioned, the defendant typically pleads guilty to the underlying crime and participates in WIT Court as a sentence and/or condition of probation. Upon graduation of the program however, the criminal conviction is vacated.

Once in the program, the participants are provided with mental health counseling, psychiatric services, drug and alcohol abuse counseling, residential treatment, safe housing, family counseling and peer mentoring. The Participants are also assisted in accessing medical services, employment counseling, job training and placement, government benefits, and housing. (As stated at, http://www.occourts.org/directory/ collaborative-courts/).

Continue reading ""Whatever it Takes" Court or "WIT" Court Helps Those Who Committed a Crime Because of a Mental Illness" »

How an Experienced Criminal Defense Attorney Can Save You Thousands of Dollars

After a person is arrested and taken into custody, at the first appearance before a judge they have a right to a “bail hearing” where the amount of bail is set. When a defendant makes “bail” this means they are giving a specified amount of money to the court in exchange for being let out of jail with a promise that they will return to court at their next scheduled appearance. If the defendant returns to court as scheduled, the bail is exonerated and the full amount of money is returned. However, if the defendant does not return as promised, the bail is forfeited and the money is kept by the court.

Most people don’t have large amounts of cash lying around, so the most common way for a person to make bail is through a bail bondsman. Generally, a bondsman will charge 10% and require some sort of collateral to post bail on behalf of the defendant. For example, if the bail is $10,000 (the common amount for a second DUI charge), the defendant must give the bondsman $1,000 plus some form of collateral, such as the pink slip to their vehicle. If the defendant does not skip out on bail and returns to court as scheduled, the defendant will receive the collateral back and the bondsman will receive the $10,000 back from the court and keep the 10% fee.

A defendant has a right to a “reasonable” bail. Usually, the judge initially sets bail according to a pre-determined county-wide bail schedule. For example, in Orange County, the charge of rape carries a $100,000 bail, grand theft is $20,000 or the amount stolen, and a first time DUI is $2,500.

However, a judge may deviate from the bail schedule based on many factors relating to the facts surrounding the crime charged and the particular defendant. For example, a defendant charged with a first time DUI who has no criminal history and extensive ties to the community such as a family, job, and property ownership, will likely be able to have his bailed reduced to zero. When bail is reduced to zero, the judge is letting the person off “on his own recognizance” or “O.R.”

Continue reading "Bail Explained" »

Street encounters with police occur with varying degrees of coercion. An encounter with police is best understood by breaking it down into three categories:

1. Where a citizen feels "free to leave" and terminate the encounter at will. Here, there has been no "detention" under the law. This falls outside the scope of Fourth Amendment protections prohibiting unreasonable searches and seizures of a person, their home, papers, and effects;


2. Brief "seizures", which triggers Fourth Amendment protections and also allows police more authority if acting with reasonable, specific, and articulable suspicion;


3. Arrests. An arrest must be supported by probable cause. To know and protect your constitutional rights under the Fourth Amendment, you must understand the meaning of "probable cause" and being "under arrest," and their relationship to the facts of your case.

Continue reading "Encounters With Police - Know Your Rights to Avoid Arrest and Conviction" »

An Experienced Criminal Defense Firm Will Do Everything Possible in Order to Prevent their Client from Having to Register as a Sex Offender

Antioch, a small community outside of San Francisco, has recently been making national headlines for being the home of over 100 sex offenders. Most specifically, it was the home of sex offender Phillip Garrido, who is accused of holding Jaycee Lee Dugard against her will for the past 18 years. Dugard’s horrifying story has put the spotlight on the community of Antioch, which has become a haven for sex offenders.

According to the latimes.com report, at least four sex offenders were registered within walking distance of one neighbor, including the man who perpetrated the sinister crime towards Dugard. An unidentified Antioch resident and neighbor of Garrido’s acknowledged that they were aware that their San Francisco suburb had become a safe haven for registered sex offenders due to both a lack of policing in the area and low cost of living expenses.

The woman said, “We’re mostly an older bunch, and we don’t pay that much attention. This is Boonieville. Honey, I collect knives. I wouldn’t mind doing them harm.”

Investigators are continuing to scour the home and property where the abducted girl was held for 18 years, and now claim that Garrido is considered a person of interest in other open cases where women working as prostitutes were found dead near his workplace.

Continue reading "Community is a Haven for Sex Offenders" »

A 45-year-old Orange County man was sentenced to 17 years imprisonment for possessing homemade explosive devices with the intent to kill his former wife, her divorce attorney, the family court judge and Huntington Beach Police Department officers. The Costa Mesa resident was ultimately charged with a laundry list of offenses, 15 felony counts in all, including stalking, possession of a destructive device with intent to injure, possession of a homemade deadly weapon and possession of a loaded firearm in public.

The convicted man had been married to his wife for 14 years before they were divorced in 2007. The estranged wife then gained sole custody of the couple’s two children, ages 11 and 13, and eventually kicked him out of their home. In recent months it was reported that the man’s spousal and child support payments had substantially increased.

In April 2008, the man was placed on probation after pleading guilty to four misdemeanor violations of breaking a domestic violence restraining order. Several months later, authorities accused him of making threats against his wife and her divorce lawyer. Authorities later pulled the suspect’s car over in a traffic stop on the Garden Grove Freeway and recovered handcuffs, pepper spray, throwing knives and a stolen 9-millimeter firearm with its serial numbers removed.

Continue reading "O.C. Man Sentenced to 17 Years for Making Threats to Wife and Family Law Judge" »

An Experienced Criminal Defense Attorney Will Take All Steps Necessary to Neutralize Any Prejudice a Criminal Defendant Faces in the Press While Diligently Defending Against Serious Charges

A report filed by Elizabeth Espinosa for KTLA.com details the incredible story of a 29-year-old girl who was recently found after being kidnapped and held captive for 18 years. The girl was abducted nearly two decades earlier from a school bus stop in South Lake Tahoe, the crime being witnessed by her step-father. All this time, the girl was thought to be dead by both her parents and loved ones.

Authorities say that the 29-year-old women walked into a police station in Concord and told investigators that she was the girl who had been kidnapped 18 years earlier.

As investigators continue to explore the facts surrounding this case, they continue to uncover more unbelievable facts. According to a USA Today report, the kidnapped girl was kept in a shed in an Antioch backyard and bore 2 children by the suspect. The girl was kept isolated from the world and forced to live in a shed, tents and outbuildings.

Continue reading "Kidnapped Girl Found 18 Years after Being Abducted" »

Located within the lively expanse of Los Angeles County, Torrance had an estimated population of 140,820 in July 2008. Torrance’s population is sure to keep growing as more and more people are drawn to convenient access to beaches, pleasant weather, secure communities, and successful businesses. The 2009 California Population Estimate predicts that Torrance will become the eighth largest city in Los Angeles County and the 35th largest in the state of California as it is expected to reach a population of 149,111.

Such an influx of visitors and residents brings about an increase of vehicles on Torrance roads in which law enforcement keeps a sharp eye out for drivers they suspect to be operating their vehicles while under the influence of alcohol or drugs. In such an event, those who are charged with DUI in Torrance have the right to seek quality legal assistance from an experienced Torrance DUI defense attorney.

When charged with DUI in Torrance, most people do not realize just how many consequences they face. If you fail to request a DMV hearing within 10 days of your arrest, 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 Torrance 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 Torrance 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 our Torrance criminal defense lawyers today for a case evaluation at 888-280-6839.

An Experienced Criminal Defense Attorney Will Negate Any Prejudicial Effect and Fight for Your Right to a Fair Trial

There are two sides to every story. A trial was held when a man pled not guilty to allegedly throwing his daughter off a 120-foot cliff to avoid paying child support. The media has sensationalized the case and prosecutors have “played up” the most lurid details in an effort to obtain a conviction by possibly prejudicing the jury pool.

The district attorney in the case theorized that the man threw his daughter off of the cliff to avoid paying $1,000 per month in child support. The district attorney argued that the defendant was never a father to his daughter and that he only saw his daughter after he was forced to pay child support. However, the defendant strongly asserts that it was a terrible accident.

The allegations against the defendant in this case are so prejudicial to him that it would be extremely difficult for him to receive a fair trial. Nonetheless, as a criminal defendant, he is entitled to a fair trial. An experienced California criminal defense attorney knows the necessity and details regarding a criminal defendant’s right to a fair trial.

Continue reading "A Father Who Faces Murder Charges Also Faces a Prejudiced Jury" »

You no longer can be thrown in jail for taking part in that office betting pool when March Madness or Super Bowl comes around. In early August Governor Schwarzenegger signed a law that changes the penalty for participation in a non-commerical or an office “sports betting pool” from a misdemeanor, punishable by fines up to $1,000, to an infraction, punishable by a fine not to exceed $250.

This change in the law came three years after a 76-year old grandmother and bartender at the Elks Lodge in Riverside County was convicted and fined for a organizing a betting pool. The woman organized a betting pool on football in which 10 people put in $5 each. She was fined $130, had her fingerprints and mug shot taken and was cited for running a betting pool.

The California Legislature and the Governor agree that law enforcement resources should be expended to investigate serious crimes. Such resources should not be expended arresting and prosecuting an elderly woman betting on football.

Continue reading "Legislature Passes Reducing Offense to Infraction for Office Sports Betting Pools" »

The city of Palmdale has grown immensely as a city located in the northeast region of Los Angeles County. Palmdale had an estimated population of 151,346 in January 2009, drawing new residents to live close to the stunning San Gabriel Mountain range. As a city that is mostly full of family communities, Palmdale’s growth and popularity has made it California’s largest desert city. Although Palmdale is considered a safe community, law enforcement is always on the look-out for drunk drivers in which those who are arrested or charged with DUI have the right to seek a skilled Palmdale DUI defense attorney for legal advice and representation.

There is much to consider when facing DUI charges in Palmdale, or any other criminal charges for that matter. It is important to remember that an accused is innocent until proven guilty; however, much social stigma is attached to criminal offenses, such as drunk driving, even before a case goes to trial. At Wallin & Klarich, our aggressive and knowledgeable criminal defense attorneys have been helping protect the rights of those accused of criminal offenses in California for over 30 years. Our experience lends us a wide-range of skills and resources that are necessary for a positive outcome in any criminal case.

If you have been charged with driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or are facing any other criminal charges in Palmdale, the criminal defense lawyers at Wallin & Klarich are here to help. We understand that you may be feeling overwhelming and even frightened, but with one of our attorneys by your side, you can rest assured that everything that can be done to build you a strong defense will be put into action. For a case evaluation, call Wallin & Klarich today at 888-280-6839 or visit www.wklaw.com today for more information.

An Experienced Criminal Defense Attorney Knows How to Argue Against Facts Underlying a Dismissed Charge

A California appellate court has recently held that trial courts have broad discretion in granting or denying probation and imposing probation conditions. Further, the appellate court ruled that a trial court even may consider a charge that the defendant was not convicted of or pled guilty to. See People v. Martin, C.A. 4th/2, DAR p.10639.

In this case, the defendant was accused of domestic violence and resisting arrest. The defendant, in a plea agreement, pled guilty to the charge alleging that he resisted arrest. However, the defendant did not plead guilty to the domestic violence charge.

After the plea agreement was entered, the trial court imposed certain probation conditions addressing domestic violence (e.g., not to come within 100 yards of person’s home). The defendant attempted to argue that the court should not consider facts that pertain solely to a charge that has been dismissed as part of a plea agreement.

Continue reading "A Court May Consider a Dismissed Charge When Imposing Probation Conditions" »

Evidence from Warrantless Vehicle Search Incident to Passenger’s Arrest is Suppressed where Defendant was Inside Patrol Vehicle when Searched

Defendant, Gonzalez, was convicted of Possession of a Firearm and Ammunition. This conviction resulted when a firearm was found during a June 19, 2006 traffic stop of a car in which Gonzalez was riding. The police, following the arrest of another passenger with outstanding warrants, searched the passenger compartment and found a loaded firearm in side the glove box. Gonzalez filed a motion to suppress; he asserted the search of the car violated his Fourth Amendment rights.

The Supreme Court in Arizona v. Gant, 129 S. Ct. 1710 (2009), held that police may search a vehicle incident to arrest only if the arrested person is within reaching distance of the passenger compartment of the car at the time of the search or it is reasonable to believe that the vehicle contains evidence of the offense of arrest. 129 S. Ct. at 1723-24. When these justifications are absent, a search of an arrestee’s vehicle will be unreasonable unless police obtain a warrant or show that another exception to the warrant requirement applies.

Continue reading "Vehicle Searches Incident to Arrest " »

A Skilled Defense Attorney Can Prevent a Defendant from Facing the Death Penalty or Life without Parole

The man who invoked fear and uneasiness throughout the USC campus and surrounding community has been found guilty of second degree murder by a Los Angeles court, according to the latimes.com website. The convicted man is 25 years old, and lived down the street from the USC campus, sometimes working as an usher during USC football games at the Los Angeles Coliseum. He now faces 16 years to life in prison, and will be sentenced in October. The convicted man was charged with stabbing a twenty-three year old USC film student and former West Point Cadet to death.

The 25 year old man avoided a first-degree murder charge because the defense proved that the prosecution failed to show the required evidence proving that the murder was premeditated.

The victim was returning home after a late night of drinking when he began arguing with the defendant in front of an apartment complex. The argument escalated into a fight. Prosecutors contend that the defendant ran inside the apartment and picked up a kitchen knife, which he used to stab the film student in the heart. The USC campus was shaken by the incident, as it was the latest in a string of violent offenses that had occurred in the surrounding areas.

Continue reading "LA Man Found Guilty of Second Degree Murder instead of First Degree Murder for the Killing of a USC Film Student" »

Penal Code section 801.5 provides that prosecution of certain offenses, including grand theft, fraud and perjury, “shall be commenced within four years after discovery of the commission of the offenses . . . .” (emphasis added). Section 803, subdivision (c), provides that the four-year statute of limitations “does not commence to run until the discovery of [the] offense . . . .” (emphasis added).

The Penal Code does not specifically identify whose discovery triggers the running of the statutes of limitations, but case law holds that the limitations period begins running on the date either the “victim” or a responsible “law enforcement official” learn of facts which, if investigated with reasonable diligence, would make that person aware a crime had occurred. (People v. Kronemyer (1987) 189 Cal.App.3d 314, 330-331 (Kronemyer); People v. Lopez (1997) 52 Cal.App.4th 233, 246 (Lopez).)

For purposes of determining whether a particular person’s discovery of facts will be deemed to trigger the running of the statute of limitations, a “victim” does not include a person with a “special relationship” to the actual victim of the defendant’s crime, nor does a “victim” include a person with a “special interest” in the subject matter of the crime. In short, the criminal discovery statutes extend no further than those persons who are direct victims of a crime, and those persons who are clothed with a status imposed by law.

Continue reading "Statute of limitations for Filing Grand Theft Charge Commences when Government Entity with Duty to Investigate and Report Crime Discovers Offense" »

Lancaster is located in Southern California’s Antelope Valley and is the ninth fastest growing city in the United States. With an estimated 145,243 residents living in the city in 2008, Lancaster is the eighth largest city in Los Angeles County. The city draws national and local companies in from many different types of businesses and industries. Many inhabitants are drawn to Lancaster to pursue the American Dream of establishing a business and becoming a homeowner since the area is known for its business-friendly guidelines and low-cost land. Similar to many other busy cities, Lancaster experiences incidents of various crimes in which those accused have the right to seek legal representation and guidance from a qualified Lancaster criminal defense attorney.

At Wallin & Klarich, our dedicated lawyers understand how challenging being accused of a criminal offense can be for a person who is feeling overwhelmed and frightened. Simply put, the legal matters surrounding criminal charges are extremely complex, especially when it comes to DUI offenses. Poor driving skills or mistakes on the road can sometimes be interpreted by law enforcement as similar to how drivers under the influence of alcohol or drugs would operate his or her vehicle. When charged with a DUI in Lancaster, your future depends on contacting a skilled Lancaster DUI defense attorney who can ensure that you are familiar with your rights and legal options.

In defending the rights of those accused of criminal offenses in Lancaster, including drunk driving, Wallin & Klairch has over 30 years of experience as California criminal defense attorneys. Our criminal defense law firm will meticulously examine your case and investigate the validity of evidence being held against you. To learn more about how we can build you a strong defense in your DUI or criminal case, contact Wallin & Klarich today at 888-280-6839.

Arrests for Driving Under the Influence (DUI) continue to rise in California. Along with the increasing number of arrests, the penalties associated with a conviction continue to escalate. California Vehicle Section 23152 states that it is unlawful for any person who is under the influence of any alcoholic beverage or drug, or under the combined influence of any alcoholic beverage and drug, to drive a vehicle. It is unlawful for any person who has 0.08 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood to drive a vehicle.

If you are convicted of a DUI, significant penalties will be assessed against you. These penalties include a mandatory suspended license. Unless you fight the charge, the Department of Motor Vehicles will automatically suspend your license. In addition to loss of driving privileges, a person convicted of DUI will have to pay substantial fees and penalties to the court. A person convicted for a DUI will also see their auto insurance rates skyrocket. Couple court fees and penalties with the skyrocketing insurance premiums, and the benefits of hiring an aggressive criminal defense attorney become apparent.

An experienced California DUI defense attorney is your best chance at having DUI charges against you dismissed or lowered to a lesser offense. Often times an attorney can greatly reduce the penalties and fines a person must pay. Most attorneys do not practice criminal law, and as such you need to hire a law firm that specializes in criminal defense.

Continue reading "Severe Penalties Associated with Driving Under the Influence Emphasizes the Necessity of Hiring an Experienced Criminal Defense Attorney" »

An Experienced Criminal Defense Attorney is the Only Place to Turn to Avoid a Lengthy Prison Stay

Unfortunately for many people, criminal charges tend to follow after a night of drinking. Such was the case for a 24 year old man arrested on August 3, 2009. After a long night of drinking, the defendant was arrested for public intoxication; a misdemeanor charge that in California, under California Penal Code Section 647, could result in 6 months in jail, as well as fines. The arresting officer claimed that the he observed the man stumbling in the street around 3:00am. Sadly, the man’s troubles did not end there.

According to police, the man was placed in the back of the police vehicle while he was transported to the county jail. Once the police vehicle reached the jail, the man pulled his legs between his hand-cuffed wrists to get his arms in front of him. The man then broke the police vehicle’s window and climbed through. Police quickly stopped the man before he got too far. He was then charged with felony for trying to escape police custody. The new felony charge for attempting to escape carries a 20 year maximum sentence.

Continue reading "From Misdemeanor Drunk in Public to Felony Escape of Police Custody" »

An Experienced Criminal Defense Attorney Will Protect Your Right from a Warrantless Search of Your Home

Any person can call law enforcement and complain to tell them that a person is drinking and driving. If a complaint names the suspected drunk driver, law enforcement may be able to go the house of the named suspect and lawfully search the home without a warrant.

Some courts have held that these searches are lawful while other courts have held that these searches violate a person’s rights and are therefore illegal. Either way however, courts agree that an important factor to consider in determining whether the search was legal or not was whether “exigency” exists. Exigency exists when law enforcement fear that evidence may be destroyed, thus law enforcement can search without a warrant to prevent the evidence from being destroyed.

In the context of a DUI investigation, the police and prosecutors will argue that an entry into a home, even without a warrant, was necessary to preserve evidence of blood alcohol content. For example, law enforcement would argue that a warrantless entry was necessary to preserve the bottle of alcohol the suspect possibly drank from. However, this argument alone is rarely sufficient to justify a warrantless entry into a home.

Continue reading "A Drinking and Driving Complaint May Give Rise to a Warrantless Search of Your Home" »

Located within the vast spread of Los Angeles County, Pasadena is a diverse city mostly known for putting on the nationally viewed Tournament of Roses parade and the annual Rose Bowl Football game. With an approximate population of 146,518 reported in 2007, Pasadena is the sixth largest city in LA County and has attracted many new residents and returning visitors as a cultural hot spot in the San Gabriel Valley. It may be no surprise then that four highly traversed freeways run through Pasadena, putting law enforcement on alert for signs of drivers operating vehicles while under the influence of drugs or alcohol. In the event that a person is arrested for DUI in Pasadena, he or she is innocent until proven guilty and is entitled to seeking assistance from a skilled Pasadena DUI defense attorney.

Although Pasadena is considered a very safe community, some drivers may be suspected of violating the law and accused of putting other drivers and pedestrians at risk. Being charged with a DUI in Pasadena presents serious challenges that no one ever expects they will face. Ensuring that your constitutional rights are protected is essential in accordance with having an experienced attorney who has handled hundreds of DUI cases investigate the accuracy of tests that were conducted to determine your level of intoxication, among many other factors. You do not have to go through this alone.

At Wallin & Klarich, our experienced Pasadena criminal defense lawyers have the legal knowledge and resources to handle a wide-range of cases relating to DUI, juvenile offenses, theft crimes, violent crimes, sex offenses, and much more. With over 30 years devoted to aggressively defending the rights of those accused of criminal offenses in California, our attorneys are prepared to assist you in all the several ways that we can. Call Wallin & Klarich today for a case evaluation at 888-280-6839.

An Experienced Criminal Defense Firm will Expose a Lack of Reliability from an Anonymous Informant

An anonymous tip, standing alone, seldom will exhibit sufficient indicia of reliability to support reasonable suspicion for an investigatory or traffic stop. An informant who provides information face-to-face to law enforcement is not considered the same as an anonymous tipster. See United States v. Romain, 393 F.3d, 63 (2004).

Officers do not have the same duty to confirm the citizen informant's information before acting on it. When information is provided to law enforcement from an anonymous tipster, police officers do not have the opportunity to evaluate personally an informant's expression, tone of voice, and mannerisms.

Continue reading "Officer's Have Heightened Duty to Confirm an Anonymous Tipster's Information" »

An Experienced Criminal Defense Attorney Knows How to Effectively Rebut this Presumption

As discussed in the blog yesterday, a person who tips officers to suspected criminal conduct is called an “informant.” A citizen informant generally gains knowledge of an alleged criminal offense by being either a witness or a victim. A citizen informant is deemed to be reliable, unless this presumption of reliability is rebutted.

Courts have held that a citizen informant providing information to law enforcement generally has a strong basis of knowledge and there is little concern for the motives behind volunteering the information. However, information provided by an informant is often inaccurate and uncorroborated. For this reason, hiring a knowledgeable and experienced criminal defense attorney is paramount.

Continue reading "Courts Give a Presumption of "Reasonable Suspicion" Established from a Citizen Informant's Statements" »

Why You Need a Criminal Defense Attorney Who Knows Search and Seizure Laws

In order to conduct a legal traffic stop, an officer must have what is called “reasonable suspicion” to stop the car. Often, officers will rely on a tip they received from someone who may know the suspect, one who may have seen the suspect engage in an illegal activity, or a person with a hunch to create the requisite reasonable suspicion. A person who tips officers to suspected criminal conduct is called an “informant.”

In order to use an informant to build reasonable suspicion, the officer must consider the reliability of the information. In United States v. Leos-Quijada, 107 F.3d 786 (10th Cir. 1997), the court stated that when information comes from an informant, reliability may be assessed by viewing the credibility of the informant, the basis of the informant's knowledge, and the extent to which the police are able to independently verify the tip.

The lower the reliability, credibility, or veracity of the informant, the more information that is required to create reasonable suspicion. Often times, in a California DUI case, the arresting officer is unable to sufficiently verify the basis for the information, or the reliability of the informant.

Continue reading "A Traffic Stop Based on an Anonymous Informant's Tip Must Be Reliable to be a Legal Stop" »

The California Court of Appeal in People v. Hernandez found that when an armed sheriff stood behind the defendant while the defendant was testifying this violated the defendant’s right to a fair trial.

An experienced defense attorney knows that there are many factors a court may not consider in ensuring the defendant’s right to a fair trial. The Court of Appeal found for the defense; the use of an armed guard behind a defendant undermines the fairness of the fact-finding process, thereby prejudicing the jury against the defendant.

When a judge denies a defendant to the right to a fair trial, a defendant needs an experienced criminal defense attorney in California to fight for his or her rights.

Continue reading "Conviction Reversed and Defendant Wins New Trial After Appeal is Granted: You Have the Right to a Fair Trial" »

During a California DUI detection process, the officer screens (or tests) a driver prior to making an arrest decision.

The pre-arrest screening phase starts out with the administration of the standardized field sobriety tests. These tests are said to be designed to assess a driver’s mental and physical impairment.

The three most commonly used field sobriety tests are:

1. horizontal gaze nystagmus


2. walk and turn test


3. one-leg stand test

The walk and turn test and one-leg stand test are considered to be divided-attention tests, requiring concentration on multiple tasks. These tasks are designed to simulate the same physical and mental tasks that are required for a person to safely drive a vehicle.

Continue reading "Do Standardized Field Sobriety Tests Accurately Assess a Driver's Mental and Physical Impairment? " »

Hollywood is a well-known district in Los Angeles, California located just west-northwest of Downtown LA. Hollywood is most known for being the historical center of movie stars and movie studios. A few out of many landmarks in Hollywood include the Hollywood Bowl, Capitol Records, Grauman's Chinese Theatre, the Shrine Auditorium, and the Griffith Park Observatory. According to the 2000 census, 210,777 people lived in Hollywood with a population density of 8,443 people per square mile. Given the proximity of Hollywood’s inhabitants and the many tourists who visit throughout the year, it is crucial that anyone charged with a DUI seek legal assistance from a skilled Hollywood criminal defense attorney.

In the event that an individual is accused of reckless driving behavior under the influence of alcohol that results in bodily harm or property damage, he or she will need help from an experienced Hollywood DUI lawyer. The California Department of Motor Vehicles concluded that DUI arrests in 2007 amounted to 203,866, in which 197,602 resulted in misdemeanor DUI arrests. Consequences associated with driving under the influence impose many inconveniences on a person and often create a stressful situation. Fortunately, with the help of a skilled attorney, you can increase your chances at achieving a positive outcome.

At Wallin & Klarich, our criminal defense attorneys have years of experience defending those accused of driving under the influence while in Hollywood, and are prepared to handle every aspect of your case. Our DUI attorneys will examine the circumstances of your DUI arrest, in order to provide you with the best possible defense. Please call us today for case evaluation so that we can begin to help you get your life back on track.

Why You Need an Experienced Three Strikes Criminal Defense Law Firm

In the recent case of Superior Court v. Nguyen held that a juvenile who was adjudicated a ward of the court in Juvenile Court for a crime that would be considered a strike under California Three Strike Laws will count as a strike if that juvenile offender commits another felony. In a 6-1 Supreme Court decision, the Nguyen case allows prosecutors to allege a prior juvenile strike for purposes of increasing the punishment on any new felony committed as an adult. It is crucial that your criminal defense attorney know and understand this important case.

If you or a loved one is charged with a serious crime in juvenile court it is more important then ever to seek competent legal counsel that understands the implications of a juvenile being charged with a serious felony. Unlike other juvenile cases, this new law allows a juvenile adjudication (conviction) to follow that juvenile through his/her adult life. The stakes are too high not to seek the best attorney you can find.

Continue reading "Supreme Court Rules that Juvenile "Strikes" Can be Used Under Three Strikes Law" »

Why You Need a Criminal Defense Attorney to Defend Your Rights

During the course of an ordinary traffic stop, an officer may detect clues of an illegal drug crime in California. These clues, while seemingly inconsequential, when considered in the aggregate, may provide the additional reasonable suspicion required to detain an individual for further investigation.

Generally, no single factor will justify further detention. Each individual factor, considered separately, may well have an innocent explanation, but still suggest illegal activity in the aggregate. United States v. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266 (2002).

Continue reading "Inconsequential "Clues" Considered Together May Amount to Reasonable Suspicion of Criminal Activity" »

Valencia, California is a planned community that along with three other communities, merged to form Santa Clarita, California in 1987. The area is extensively used as filming locations for many TV series', past and present. Some of these shows include The Power Rangers, NCIS, Weeds and Melrose Place. Valencia is also known for its paseos, a network of walkways that connect the entire community without crossing streets at grade. The current population is estimated to be 32,642. Considering the vast population that inhabits Valencia’s community, not to mention the many visitors and travelers who traverse through its roadways, it is crucial that any matters involving a drunk driving offense be handled by an experienced Valencia criminal defense lawyer.

When charged with DUI in Valencia, many people are left feeling confused and overwhelmed regarding their rights and the potential effects of serious consequences they may face. If you fail to request a DMV hearing within 10 days of your arrest, 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 Valencia 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 Valencia 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.