Southern California Defense Blog

On Friday, September 18, 2009 a Hofstra University Student returns to school to after being falsely accused of rape. Authorities dropped charges and freed four men, one of which was a Hofstra student, hours after their accuser told law enforcement that she had made up the sexual assault.

The accuser initially said that she had been forcibly tied up and sexually assaulted in a dormitory bathroom. However, after authorities told her that part of the incident was recorded on a cell phone video, the woman admitted the encounters with each of the men were consensual.

The falsely accused suffered from extreme public scrutiny. Their pictures were flashed across the news and they were treated like animals. This is just one case where the alleged victim admits to making up the accusations. It makes one wonder, how many people are serving time for something they did not do?

Continue reading "Hofstra University Student Falsely Accused of Rape Return to School" »

When a person causes an unlawful killing of another human being with “malice aforethought”, this is considered murder. “Malice aforethought” is when the defendant had the intent to kill, the intent to cause serious bodily harm, consciously disregarded human life or committed a felony and a person was killed as a direct result of that felony.

Thus, malice is implied when the defendant is subjectively aware that his or her conduct endangers the life of another and acts despite this awareness. However, to prove that the defendant was not subjectively aware, the defense can argue and introduce evidence of mental disease, defect, or disorder, or of voluntary intoxication to raise a reasonable doubt about whether the defendant acted with malice.

The prosecution bears the burden of proving that the defendant acted with malice in a murder case. Thus in order to create reasonable doubt, a defense attorney should have the defendant evaluated by an expert medical witness. Once evaluated, and a favorable result is found, a skilled California violent crime defense attorney will present the evidence at trial or at plea negotiations to help his or her client.

Continue reading "Mental Disease or Defect in a Homicide Case" »

ATTACKING OFFICER'S DETERMINATION OF YOUR SPEED

When you are charged with exceeding a posted speed limit in an area where the limit is absolute, you are guilty if it can be determined that you drove over the speed limit. However, you are not without viable defenses.

One such defense is to attack the officer's determination of your speed. This is accomplished by discovering what method the officer used to cite you, and aggressively attacking that particular method. Even when charged with violating a posted or "absolute" speed limit, defenses remain available to avoid being found guilty in court.

Continue reading "Part 2 - In California, Speed Limits Are "Absolute" On Freeways, but "Presumed" Almost Everywhere Else" »

As a main area of California’s Inland Empire, the city of San Bernardino is home to approximately 205,010 inhabitants. Within its stretch of 78.5 square miles in size, San Bernardino is the eighteenth largest city in California based on population. Situated at the foothills of the San Bernardino Mountains, San Bernardino draws visitors from all across California and from out-of-state. Considering that the densely populated area of San Bernardino is prone to a relatively large amount of passerby, tourists and residents of San Bernardino may find themselves the subject of an arrest for reckless driving, which can include charges of drunk driving in some incidents.

No one ever expects that they will be pulled over for reckless driving, let alone drunk driving. However, if an officer believes that you have operated your vehicle in “willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property”, as the California Vehicle Code 23103 defines, then you may faces charges of reckless driving. Taking into account that reckless driving is a misdemeanor offense and can result in stern penalties such as a fine of $145 to $1,000, imprisonment for 5 to 90 days, or both, an accused individual may want to contact an experienced San Bernardino reckless driving defense lawyer.

If you have been charged with reckless driving or with DUI in San Bernardino, get in touch with a skilled and aggressive Southern California criminal defense lawyer from Wallin and Klarich as soon as possible. Our attorneys have been defending the rights of those facing criminal charges in California for over 30 years, providing us the knowledge and familiarity with local courts that you need to obtain a successful outcome in your criminal case. Call Wallin and Klarich today at 888-280-6839 for a case evaluation.

There are two basic types of speed limits in California:

1. Absolute


2. Presumed

Each type of speed-limit violation often requires a unique defense. It is key to hire an experienced attorney who understands each of the different types traffic violations.

"Absolute" speed laws apply in a situation where you are driving on a highway where the maximum speed limit is 65 miles per hour. It is a violation of the law to travel at greater than 65 miles per hour, even if it is 3am and it appears perfectly safe to do so.

On the other hand “presumed” violations of the speed laws pertain to a possible violation of California Vehicle Code 22350. If the posted speed limit on a city street is 40 miles per hour, that is a “presumption” that it is not safe to go faster than 40 miles per hour. However, you can raise a defense that you were going 45 miles per hour at 3am and there was no traffic on the street. In that instance you could win your case with that defense.

Continue reading "Part 1 - In California, Speed Limits Are "Absolute" On Freeways, but "Presumed" Almost Everywhere Else" »

Up and down the California coast, beautiful scenery blankets city after city. Huntington Beach, California is one such city that can truly be deemed picturesque. Housing a population of 192,620 as of July 2008, and measuring 31.6 square miles in size, Huntington Beach, commonly known as Surf City, welcomes a large number of tourists each and every year. The host site of a variety of coastal events, such as surf competitions, Huntington Beach has a steady stream of both residents and visitors coming and going year-round, making its roads and highways particularly busy on any given day.

The city’s revenue stream relies heavily on tourism. As a result, Huntington Beach is littered with bars and restaurants catering to individuals hoping to experience fun times in such a prime tourist spot. However, with so many individuals enjoying the nightlife that Huntington Beach has to offer, it is not out of the ordinary that driving under the influence (DUI) can impact an individual’s life. According to the California Department of Motor Vehicles, there were 6,264 felony DUI arrests and 197,602 misdemeanor DUI arrests across the state of California in 2007. Reckless driving practice and DUI never end well; however, an experienced Huntington Beach reckless driving attorney can help build a strong defense on your behalf.

If charged with reckless driving or DUI in the Huntington Beach area, it is absolutely imperative that you seek the services of a skilled criminal defense attorney that will sort through the details of your case and defend your rights at all times. At Wallin & Klarich, our attorneys have years of experience on their side, and understand how devastating a DUI or reckless driving charge can be. Our attorneys will examine the circumstances of your arrest and will see to it that your rights are upheld in a court of law. Don’t hesitate to contact us today for an evaluation of your reckless driving or DUI case. Call us toll-free at 888-280-6839 today.

In the case of People v. Watson (1981) 30 Cal.3d 290, the California Supreme Court ruled that if a person drives a car in a manner demonstrating a conscious disregard for human life, this will constitute “implied malice,” and the driver can be prosecuted and convicted of second-degree murder.

This means that if a person is killed as a result of extremely reckless driving, it may be considered an unlawful killing with malice aforethought. The “malice” necessary for a murder conviction will be implied from the conduct. This situation is most prevalent when a driver is fleeing from police or driving at a very high speed in an extremely reckless and dangerous manner.

Continue reading "Driver Can Be Prosecuted and Convicted of Second-Degree Murder" »

It is the prosecution’s burden to justify a warrantless search or seizure. People v. Williams (1999) 20 Cal. 4th 119. The defendant has the right to suppress evidence when the evidence is obtained by an illegal detention, arrest, or search in violation of both the United States Constitution and Cal Pen. Code section 1538.5.

In addition, the exclusionary rule of the Fourth Amendment prohibits the admission of evidence obtained as a result of an unconstitutional search and seizure. Wong Sun v. United States (1963) 371 U.S. 471.

An experienced California criminal defense attorney will be able to tell you whether your encounter with police will be deemed a "seizure" triggering Fourth Amendment protections.

Continue reading "Prosecution's Burden to Justify a Warrantless Search or Seizure" »

Once it can be shown that a motorist is “in custody,” he or she must be afforded the constitutional protections of Miranda. It is settled amongst the courts that the safeguards prescribed by Miranda become applicable as soon as a suspect’s freedom of action is curtailed to a “degree associated with formal arrest.” (California v. Beheler 463 US 1121, 1983).

When dealing with the protections of Miranda, it is important to note that the question is not whether a motorist has actually been formally placed under arrest, but rather whether the motorist is subjected to treatment that renders him “in custody for practical purposes.”

Continue reading "Once a Driver is in Custody, He or She Must Be Afforded the Protections of Miranda" »

Recent unemployment numbers out of California show the unemployment rate at 12 percent. Experts predict that the unemployment rate nationally will top 10 percent. In today’s competitive job market, the difference between being hired or passed over for a position often comes down to minor factors. One of these potential factors can be past criminal convictions.

An employer may pass over a candidate who has a criminal conviction, in favor of one with a clean criminal record. However, those with a criminal conviction should not let their criminal record hold them back from gaining employment. California laws allow an individual convicted of a criminal offense, to have their record expunged, or in other words erased. There are a number of eligibility requirements that must be fulfilled before the court will grant an expungement.

Continue reading "In Tough Economic Times, an Expungement of a Criminal Conviction Can Help" »

An Experienced Criminal Defense Firm Can Help You Withdraw Your Plea

At any time before judgment or within 6 months after an order granting probation, and if entry of judgment was suspended, the court may permit the withdrawal of a guilty plea in California and the entry of a not guilty plea upon a showing of good cause. The decision to move to withdraw a guilty plea belongs to the defendant. Counsel may not simply refuse the defendant’s request to make the motion.

“Good cause” to set aside a guilty plea is shown when the defendant demonstrates that the plea was entered as the result of mistake, ignorance, inadvertence, or some other factor that demonstrates the defendant did not intend to accept the plea.

In one case, the defendant was allowed to withdraw guilty plea because he was not told that prison was mandatory if he pleaded guilty to robbery with use of a gun. In another case, the defendant was allowed to withdraw his plea because the prosecution withheld favorable evidence.

Other “good cause” can be demonstrated by showing that previous counsel was inadequate. Often, pleas are withdrawn if previous counsel fails to advise the defendant of his or her constitutional rights and/or counsel fails to specify the consequences of the plea agreement. When a defendant successfully withdraws his or her guilty plea, the case is restored to its status before entry of the plea; however, this includes revival of any charges dismissed under the plea bargain.

Continue reading "Withdrawing a Guilty or No Contest Plea" »

A defendant who is released on bail or on his or her own recognizance will face serious additional punishment if it is proven that he committed a new offense while his first case is still pending.

Section 12022.1 provides that a defendant who commits a crime while released pending another criminal matter “shall be subject to a penalty enhancement of an additional two years in state prison which shall be served consecutive to any other term imposed by the court.” Furthermore, this section states that the enhancement can be added to the second offense or the first offense.

Either way, if convicted, the defendant is looking at serving another two years on top of whatever sentence he or she would have to serve for the specific offense allegedly committed.

If you are a loved one is facing a “crime bail crime” allegation you should immediately hire an experienced law firm because the attorney will know of this enhancement and fight to negotiate around it. If the defendant did not commit the alleged criminal offense, then an experienced California criminal defense attorney knows how to take the cases to trial and fight for your rights.

Continue reading "Felony Committed While Out On Bail or Released On Your Own Recognizance" »

Located at the eastern side of the San Fernando Valley, the city of Glendale is a major part of Los Angeles County. With a population of 207,303 as of January 2009, Glendale is the third largest city in Los Angeles County. As with any bustling city, Glendale experiences its share of reckless driving arrests in which those who stand accused deserve to receive help from a skilled Glendale reckless driving defense attorney.

According to California Vehicle Code 23103, reckless driving is classified according to an officer of the law’s judgment, and is defined as a “willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property.” If DUI is involved, more extensive sentencing can be expected as well. Reckless driving charges can be complicated; particularly for an individual unfamiliar with Glendale city streets and who may have been unaware of either obscured signage or simply that their driving was classifiable as reckless. Charges filed against a reckless driver, including those drivers that drive while under the influence of either alcohol or drugs, can be charged with a misdemeanor, imprisonment, and steep monetary fines.

Reckless driving charges can lead to points being added to your driver’s license, which can have a lasting effect on an individual’s current insurance coverage and all subsequent coverage thereafter. The same can be said for DUI charges, which can result in even harsher punishment and repercussions as a result.

At Wallin and Klarich, our criminal defense attorneys have years of experience defending those accused of reckless driving and driving under the influence in Glendale, and are prepared to handle every aspect of your case. Our DUI lawyers will examine the details surrounding your arrest, and will provide you with the best possible defense. If you stand accused, please call us today at 888-280-6829 for a case evaluation.

Often times, a criminal investigation or charge involving your minor child will result in an expulsion hearing at their public school. It is important to seek a competent and aggressive attorney for assistance. If the criminal charges arise from a school incident, this could trigger expulsion by the school district. Sometimes the school may attempt to expel even without a criminal charge being filed.

Expulsion is a serious matter. It can go on your child’s permanent school record which may have a negative effect on college admission in the future.

Continue reading "Get an Attorney for Your Child (Part 2)" »

Your son or daughter is being charged with a crime in California. You do not know what to do or who to turn to for help. You are embarrassed or perhaps ashamed of your child’s conduct.

The laws in Juvenile Court are very different than in adult court. At a young age, it is very important to keep your child’s criminal record clean.

Minors have virtually unlimited doors of opportunity growing up and a criminal charge can close many doors quickly.

Continue reading "Get an Attorney for Your Child (Part 1)" »

Chula Vista is a beautiful California coastal city that spans 51.2 square miles in size. Housing a population of 217,478, and with over 20% population growth since the year 2000, Chula Vista finds itself home to more and more people each year, not to mention the large number of tourists that blanket Chula Vista’s streets and roadways year-round. With tourism a major source of economic stability in Chula Vista, and a number of businesses catering to vacationers as a result, numerous individuals that may not be entirely familiar with Chula Vista driving laws could find themselves on the wrong end of reckless driving charges.

Reckless driving charges can be complicated, particularly for a person that is unfamiliar with Chula Vista city streets and may have been unaware of either obscured signage or simply that their driving was classifiable as reckless. According to California Vehicle Code 23103, reckless driving is classified according to an officer of the law’s judgment, and is defined as a “willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property.” Charges filed against a reckless driver, including those drivers that drive while under the influence of either alcohol or drugs, can be charged with a misdemeanor, imprisonment, and monetary fines to pay. If DUI is involved, more extensive sentencing can be expected as well.

Unfortunately, reckless driving charges can lead to points being added to your driver’s license, which can have a lasting effect on an individual’s current insurance coverage and all subsequent coverage thereafter. The same can be said for DUI charges, which can result in even harsher punishment and repercussions as a result. In any event, a skilled Chula Vista reckless driving lawyer will see to it that your rights are upheld in a court of law.

At Wallin and Klarich, our criminal defense attorneys have years of experience defending those accused of reckless driving and driving under the influence in Chula Vista, and are prepared to handle every aspect of your case. Our DUI attorneys will examine the details surrounding your arrest, and will provide you with the best possible defense. If you stand accused, please call us today at 888-280-6829 for a case evaluation.

In People v. Butler, the court reversed appellant’s conviction for transporting cocaine, because the arresting officer lacked reasonable suspicion to stop appellant’s vehicle due to tinted windows. The court “disagreed with the People’s suggestion that seeing someone lawfully driving with tinted glass raises a reasonable suspicion of illegality such that a reasonable inquiry is justified.” (People v. Butler, 202 Cal.App.3d 602, 1998)

It is important to discuss with your attorney the circumstances of the stop of your vehicle. Know your rights and protect your freedom.

Continue reading "Does an Officer's Observations of Tinted Windows Provide Requisite Reasonable Suspicion to Justify a Stop?" »

In People v. Earle, the trial court denied the defendant’s motion for separate trials. 172 Cal.App.4th 372 (2009). The defendant was charged with one count of misdemeanor indecent exposure and another count of felony assault in California. These counts occurred on different days, in different locations and with different victims.

The defendant conceded that evidence against him for the indecent exposure count was strong but was forced to go to trial because he did not commit the felony assault he was charged with.

The court reversed the conviction for the assault count because the trial court abused its discretion by denying the motion for separate trials and permitted the prosecution to place the strongly incriminating evidence of the misdemeanor charge of indecent exposure before the same jury deciding the much more difficult felony assault charge. The jurors’ exposure to evidence resulted in gross unfairness and thus the court reversed the conviction.

Continue reading "Conviction for Assault is Reversed Where the Judge Denied Defense Counsel's Motion for Separate Trials" »

It is a Wise Decision to Never Speak to Law Enforcement Until You Have Spoken to an Experienced Criminal Defense Attorney

Once an accused has invoked the right to counsel, he may not be subjected to further interrogation unless the accused himself initiates further communication with the police.

The United States Supreme Court has made it clear that the right to counsel attaches with respect to the specific offenses for which the prosecution has been initiated. Police and prosecutors may allege that questioning of the accused was unrelated to the specific offense at issue, in an effort to avoid constitutional protections prescribed by the Sixth Amendment of the US Constitution.

Whenever you have been interviewed or questioned by police, it is important to understand the protections afforded to you by the US Constitution.

Continue reading "An Accused Who Has Invoked His Right to Counsel is Protected" »

In some situations, a search may be found reasonable despite the lack of a warrant. However, to establish the presence of emergency or "exigent" circumstances, there must be a showing of necessity. People v. Sutton (1976) 65 Cal.App.3d 341, 351. Specifically, at the time the warrantless entry is made, there must be an “imminent and substantial threat to life, health, or property.” Id. at 350.

Whether the requisite exigency is present to justify a warrantless entry into a home will depend on the surrounding circumstances. Courts tend to focus on apparent threats to safety and property, and the immanency of those threats. If you feel that your legal rights may have been violated you should immediately consult with a California criminal defense law firm that can help you win your case.

Continue reading "Exigent Circumstances May Justify a Warrantless Entry into One's Home" »

The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution prohibits brief investigatory stops of moving vehicles without “reasonable suspicion” that its occupants have been, are, or are about to be engaged in criminal activity. The concept of “reasonable suspicion” becomes extremely important when facing pending allegations of Driving Under the Influence of alcohol or drugs.

Lack of reasonable suspicion to stop a vehicle is a common argument in criminal court, and also at DMV Administrative Per Se License Suspension Hearings. However, what is determined to be “reasonable suspicion” will be left up the judge. You need an aggressive and experienced Southern California criminal defense attorney fighting for you.

Continue reading "The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution Prohibits Brief Investigatory Stops of Moving Vehicles without "Reasonable Suspicion"" »

With an approximate population of 311,575, Riverside is the biggest city in the Inland Empire Metropolitan Area. Located in Southern California, Riverside attracts many residents for its prime location 12 miles southwest of San Bernardino and 60 miles east of Los Angeles. The city of Riverside derives its name from its position next to the Santa Ana River. Although considered a safe place to live, similar to most largely populated urban areas, arrests are made time and again in Riverside for reckless driving. However, just as it is the case when an individual is arrested for DUI, being arrested for reckless driving does not mean that you are guilty.

Being charged with reckless driving in Riverside can leave a person feeling overwhelmed regarding their legal rights and the potential consequences they face. 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. Reckless driving is a misdemeanor offense and can result in imprisonment for 5 to 90 days, a fine of $145 to $1,000, or both. Considering that these penalties can greatly influence your life and your record, it may be in your best interest to contact a skilled Riverside reckless driving defense lawyer who has many years of experience handling such cases.

A reckless driving conviction in Riverside can result in the DMV adding points to your driver’s license, which is similar to what happens with a drunk driving conviction. If you are facing reckless driving or DUI charges, get in touch with the experienced Southern California criminal defense attorneys at Wallin and Klarich today. We have been aggressively defending the rights of those facing criminal charges in California for more than 30 years, providing us the legal resources and knowledge to obtain a successful outcome in any criminal case. Call Wallin and Klarich today at 888-280-6839 for a case evaluation.

In the case of People v. Ramey, 16 Cal.3d 263 (1976), the California Supreme court limited but did not prohibit the right of police officers to arrest a suspect in the home. The Court in Ramey held, “in the absence of a bona fide emergency, or consent to enter, police action is seizing the individual in the home must be preceded by the judicial authorization of an arrest warrant.” 16 Cal.3d 275. Based on the holding in Ramey, a warrantless arrest of a suspect in the home requires:

1. consent, or


2. emergency circumstances.

What this means is that there are cases that the court will dismiss if you retain a highly experienced criminal defense law firm who can bring the proper motion to the courts attention. Unfortunately too many people who could win their case, fail to retain a skilled Orange County criminal defense attorney to help them. This leads to people going to jail and having a felony record merely due to the person’s failure to act to retain a law firm to help them.

Continue reading "Protect Yourself from Being Arrested in Your Home" »

The California Third District Court of Appeal reversed a 2006 second-degree murder conviction. People v. Dungo, 2009 DJDAR 12630. In Dungo, the defendant was convicted and sentenced to 15-years-to-life for choking his girlfriend to death.

This reversal came after Melendez, discussed in the previous blog. In the California case, the criminal defense attorney successfully argued that the defendant’s rights were violated when the defendant’s counsel was not able to cross examine the medical examiner that performed the victim’s autopsy.

The medical examiner that performed the autopsy initially testified but was not answering competency questions very well. Therefore, the prosecutor pulled the actual examiner and placed the examiner’s supervisor on the stand to testify instead.

The court found that by allowing the substitute witness, the trial court violated the defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to confront his accuser. While the defendant admitted to choking her, he claims that it was because he was overcome with rage and asked the jury to find him guilty of manslaughter instead of murder.

This explains why the medical examiner’s testimony was so crucial: if he had been choking her for a while and there were additional signs of injury then the prosecution could prove murder. However if the defendant choked her for a short period of time then it substantiates the defendant’s claim that it happened out of rage.

Continue reading "New Court Ruling Results in Murder Reversal: The Criminally Accused Have a Right to Confront the Witnesses Against Them - Part II" »

The city of Anaheim is located in Orange County and has an estimated population of 348,467. As the tenth most-populated city in California, Anaheim is also ranked the fifty-fourth most-populated city in the United States. Known for its theme parks, convention center, and sports teams, Anaheim is a favorable destination for tourists, which can greatly contribute to traffic on Anaheim roads. Which such a large amount of residents and visitors traveling along the roads of Anaheim, arrests are often made for reckless driving, which can include charges for drunk driving in some incidents.

Reckless driving is a misdemeanor offense, but its consequences should not be taken flippantly. If an officer determines that you have operated 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. Considering that reckless driving charges in Anaheim can result in severe 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 obtain legal counsel and support from a skilled Anaheim reckless driving defense lawyer.

If you have been charged with reckless driving or with DUI in Anaheim, contact the experienced Southern California criminal defense attorneys at Wallin and Klarich as soon as possible. Our attorneys have been defending the rights of those facing criminal charges in California for over 30 years, providing us with the knowledge and resources to obtain a successful outcome in any criminal case. Call Wallin and Klarich today at 888-280-6839 for a case evaluation.

In Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, the defendant was convicted of drug possession. 129 S.Ct. 2527 (2009). The conviction went all the way up to the Supreme Court of the United States. The Supreme Court reversed the defendant’s drug conviction because the trial court violated the defendant’s Sixth Amendment rights.

In Melendez, the trial court admitted the prosecutions certificates by laboratory analysts, stating that the material seized by police and connected to the defendant was cocaine of a certain quantity. When the trial court admitted the certificates, this prohibited the defense from being able to cross-examine the laboratory analysts who created the certificates. Because the defense was not able to cross-examine the witness on their procedures and policies, this violated the defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to confront the witnesses against him.

Continue reading "New Court Ruling Results in Drug Conviction Reversal: The Criminally Accused Have a Right to Confront the Witnesses Against Them - Part I " »

Depending upon the facts of your case, your confession and/or admission may be inadmissible if the statements were the product of an illegal search. However, the defendant must show a relationship between the unlawful search and the defendant’s statement.

Once this has been established, the burden of proof shifts to the Prosecution to show that the confession or admission was the product of an intervening independent act of the defendant’s free will.

Like many Constitutional issues, a fact intensive analysis is required.

Continue reading "Confessions and Admissions that are Product of Illegal Search are Subject to Suppression in Court" »

An officer with probable cause to search is not prevented from doing so by someone presenting a medical marijuana card or a medical marijuana prescription.

Various courts have held that, once the officer has probable cause, the officer is entitled to continue to search and investigate, and determine whether the subject of the investigation is in fact possessing the marijuana for personal medical needs, and is adhering to the eight-ounce limit on possession.

Continue reading "Medical Marijuana Card Does Not Necessarily Protect Against Vehicle Search" »

The United States Supreme Court case of South Dakota v. Operman, 427 US 364 (1976) set for the following criteria for the lawful impound and inventory of a vehicle:

1. The vehicle must be lawfully in police custody. For example, following a traffic stop or lawful arrest of a driver.


2. The inventory must be for the purpose of listing the contents of the vehicle and not for an investigative purpose.


3. The impound and inventory must be pursuant to a standard policy of the police department involved. Meaning, the impound and inventory cannot be left wholly to the discretion of the officer seeking to conduct the impound and inventory.

Continue reading "Impound and Inventory of a Vehicle (Part 2)" »

Generally, a police officer can seize any vehicle they have probable cause to believe contains illegal items or evidence of a crime. Once the vehicle has been "seized," police can then conduct a search at a police facility or impound lot. The California Vehicle Code details when a car can and cannot be impounded.

If contraband or evidence of a crime is discovered during the course of a lawful inventory search, that evidence will be admissible in court against you.

Continue reading "Impound and Inventory of a Vehicle (Part 1)" »

The city of Santa Ana is the most populous city within the vast spread of Orange County with approximately 339,130 inhabitants. Situated along the Santa Ana River in Southern California, Santa Ana is only 10 miles from some of California’s most beautiful beaches. As a part of the second largest metropolitan area (thirteen million people) in the entire United States, Santa Ana is considered the fourth most densely populated city. In attracting visitors and new residents at a rapidly growing pace, Santa Ana’s roadways can be quite busy in which arrests are often made for reckless driving that can sometimes include charges related to driving under the influence.

California Vehicle Code 23103 characterizes reckless driving as operating a vehicle “in willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property”. If you have been charged with reckless driving in Santa Ana, it may be in your best interest to contact a skilled Santa Ana reckless driving defense lawyer who will ensure that your rights are not infringed upon. As a misdemeanor offense, reckless driving charges in Santa Ana may result in imprisonment for 5 to 90 days, a fine of $145 or $1,000, or both. Similar to a drunk driving conviction, a reckless driving conviction can result in the DMV adding points to your driver’s license.

Continue reading "Santa Ana Reckless Driving and DUI Defense Lawyers" »

Venue is where the court has jurisdiction to bring the case to trial. The defense can move the change venue to another county when it appears reasonably likely that a fair and impartial trial cannot be had in the county under Penal Code Section 1033.

The most common change of venue motion is the defense motion to change venue because of extensive pretrial publicity prejudicial to the accused. Such motion may be brought before trial, or it may be raised for the first time during jury selection or after the jury has been selected but before it is sworn.

If the motion is granted, the judge of the transferring court then determines the court in which the case is to be tried after hearing the parties’ suggestions. However, the only aspect of the case that is transferred is the trial itself, all pretrial conferences and sentencing takes place back in the original county.

Continue reading "Change of Venue Based on Fair and Impartial Trial Requirement" »

Many criminal cases are resolved by plea agreements between the district attorney’s office and defense attorney. These plea agreements may be drawn out for months and require multiple court dates for the two sides to finally come to an agreement. After all the time and energy spent on a plea agreement, some defendants have the unfortunate experience of having the Department of Probation recommend a harsher sentence.

Typically, after a person enters a plea of guilty, and probation is a term of their plea agreement, the Department of Probation will prepare a probation report. In the report, a probation officer will state whether they believe the sentence and probation is appropriate. In making their determination, the probation officer will look at the circumstances of the crime, as well as whether the individual was on probation at the time of the offense.

Judges have wide discretion in sentencing when the recommendation from probation differs from what the district attorney and defense attorney agreed to. The judge has the discretion to either follow the often harsher sentence recommended by probation, or to accept the agreed upon plea agreement. Having an aggressive criminal defense attorney is extremely beneficial in trying to convince the judge to disregard probation’s recommendation. An experienced San Diego criminal defense attorney can appropriately determine what factors would be helpful in convincing the judge not to impose a harsher sentence.

Continue reading "After a Long Fight With the District Attorney, Some Defendants Find their Biggest Opponent is the Department of Probation" »

The city of Long Beach is situated along the Pacific coast in Southern California. Long Beach boasted a population of 492,682 in January 2009, making it the second-largest city in the Los Angeles metropolitan area. Most known for being home to one of the world’s biggest shipping ports, the Port of Long Beach, the city is also a prominent contributor to the development of aerospace industry and high-technology. As more and more people are drawn to Long Beach for employment and as a place to settle down to raise a family, roads are prone to congestion and arrests are often made for reckless driving (which can include drunk driving charges).

As a misdemeanor offense, reckless driving charges in Long Beach may result in imprisonment for 5 to 90 days, a fine of $145 or $1,000, or both. California Vehicle Code 23103 characterizes reckless driving as operating a vehicle “in willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property”. If you have been charged with reckless driving in Long Beach, it may be in your best interest to contact a skilled Long Beach reckless driving defense lawyer who will ensure that your rights are not infringed upon.

Comparable 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 experienced Long Beach criminal defense lawyers at Wallin and Klarich today. We have been protecting the rights of those facing criminal charges in California for over 30 years, lending us the knowledge and resources to reach a successful result in any criminal case. Call Wallin and Klarich today at 888-280-6839 for a case evaluation.

An Experienced Defense Attorney Will Fight for Any Incriminating Statements by a Defendant or a Co-Defendant to be Inadmissible

A defendant has the right to challenge a statement made by a co-defendant or other third party on the ground that is was involuntary. A defendant has this right despite the fact that the defendant is not the one who made the statement.

In order for the statement to be involuntary the defense must show that the statement was obtained through methods of coercion. Courts consider a coerced confession unreliable and contrary to how the public at large would want law enforcement to obtain a confession. Therefore, coerced confessions are not admissible, whether they are the defendant’s own statement or those statements of a co-defendant.

Continue reading "Challenging Co-Defendant's Statement" »

What this Means for Criminal Defendants and their Attorneys

Last year, Ted Stevens, the 85-year-old former Senator from Alaska was convicted of corruption charges. Charges against Stevens played a pivotal role in voters failing to reelect the seven-term senator to office. But months after jurors found Stevens guilty, the Attorney General dismissed the case citing prosecutorial misconduct. This case is a prime example of the potential for misconduct by both federal and state prosecutors.

Over four years ago, the California state Senate created a commission to investigate the causes of wrongful convictions. The Senate created the commission in response to mounting exonerations of death-row inmates nationwide through DNA testing. The commission found that the most common type of prosecutorial misconduct was failure to disclose exculpatory evidence.

Both federal and state prosecutors have both constitutional, as well as ethical obligations to alert defense lawyers to evidence that is potentially exculpatory. Exculpatory evidence is evidence that may be used to justify or excuse an accused defendant's actions, and which will tend to show the defendant is not guilty or has no criminal intent.

Continue reading "Without Proper Regulation, Prosecutorial Misconduct is Likely to Continue" »

Why Having an Experienced Criminal Defense Attorney On Your Side Could Help You Avoid a False Conviction

DNA evidence has always been thought to be the infallible wave of the future; however, new information could change this perspective.

Even though every person’s DNA is unique, and every trace of a person’s DNA that is left behind will be identical, the testing methods available today cannot compare every single gene in a sample. In most cases, the testing works extremely well, with a very high degree of discrimination; however, there undoubtedly will always be a few inconsistencies or false identifications.

The controversy of the testing’s accuracy has centered on the admissibility of the testing evidence against a defendant. It has been argued that if the results of the tests are not 100 percent accurate, then they cannot be used as evidence of a person’s identity. This argument makes good common sense and has been given deference by some courts.

Currently, the FBI and state agencies have over one million samples of DNA in a DNA database. From this database, law enforcement agencies have created other databases of suspect types in unsolved cases, linking cases to each other to establish serial crime cases, and increasingly matching recidivist offenders to unsolved crimes generating “cold-hit matches.”

What is the problem with “cold hit matches,” you ask? The problem is that the law enforcement paradigm has shifted, with DNA matches at the beginning of an investigation rather than confirming a suspect’s identity after probable cause has been developed. Thus, the investigation begins with little more than a DNA database match, initiated by a machine calculation.

The problem with investigations on the sole basis of DNA database matches is that the system is fallible. In the U.K., where database searching has been the norm for more than a decade, several mismatches or false positives are expected every year. Though these false positive identifications are rare, they still result in investigations that may lead to convictions. This risk of coincidental matches was the central issue in the recent California case People v. Nelson (2008).

Continue reading "DNA Evidence Receives a Boost" »

Numerous Court of Appeal cases have approved the police practice of “knock and talk” based entirely on an anonymous and uncorroborated tip. Recently, the California Supreme Court stated, “even if acting on an anonymous tip, police may knock on the door of a residence, speak with the occupant, and request permission to enter and search” People v. Rivera, 41 Cal.4th 304 (2007).

An aggressive and experienced Orange County criminal defense attorney may be able to argue that such conduct on the part of the police violated your Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. An argument can be made that the sanctity of the home is threatened when police approach a residence, knock on the door, and converse with a homeowner in an effort to obtain consent to search.

Continue reading "Can Police Knock On My Front Door When Acting Solely On an Anonymous and Uncorroborated Tip?" »

Have you been convicted of a Felony in California, or been convicted of a Felony or Misdemeanor sex offense that requires you to register as a sex offender? If so, you may not have to carry the weight of your past on your shoulders anymore. With a Certificate of Rehabilitation, you can move on with your life.

A Certificate of Rehabilitation is a court order declaring that a person convicted of a Felony is now rehabilitated. Generally, if you were convicted of a Felony, and you still reside in California, you can hire a skilled criminal California defense attorney to assist you in filing a petition for a Certificate of Rehabilitation, provided that you the meet requirements of demonstrated rehabilitation, which are required by law.

If you were convicted of a felony, or a misdemeanor sex offense, which requires you to register as a sex offender, and that felony or misdemeanor sex offense was dismissed under Penal Code section 1203.4; and, you are no longer in custody, or on parole, or probation, and you have not been incarcerated since your release, and you are not on probation for any other offense, and you have continuously resided in California for 5 years, you are eligible for a Certificate of Rehabilitation.

If you were convicted of a felony after May 13, 1943, and you were sentenced to state prison and you were discharged from custody or released on parole, and you have continuously resided in California for 5 years, you are eligible for a Certificate of Rehabilitation.

Continue reading "Am I Eligible for a Certificate of Rehabilitation?" »

San Diego is the eighth biggest city in population in the United States. Located in the Southwest area of California along the Pacific Ocean, San Diego is 372.1 square miles in size. With its closeness to beautiful beaches and other relaxing areas, San Diego is a major tourist center in the state of California. San Diego’s economy relies heavily on manufacturing (home to companies such as Qualcomm Incorporated), defense (home to the largest naval fleet in the world), and tourism (home to numerous points of interest that include the San Diego Zoo and Sea World). With such an enormous quantity of drivers, residents and tourists traveling throughout San Diego, arrests are often made for reckless driving which can include drunk driving charges.

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. Reckless driving is a misdemeanor offense, but its penalties should not be taken lightly. Considering that reckless driving charges in San Diego can result in harsh consequences, such as imprisonment for 5 to 90 days, a fine of $145 to $1,000, or both, it may be in your best interest to seek legal support from a skilled San Diego reckless driving defense attorney.

If you have been charged with reckless driving or with DUI, contact the experienced Southern California criminal defense lawyers at Wallin and Klarich as soon as possible. Our attorneys have been defending the rights of those facing criminal charges in California for over 30 years, providing us with the resources and knowledge to obtain a successful outcome in any criminal case. Call Wallin and Klarich today at 888-280-6839 for a case evaluation.