Southern California Defense Blog

When doubt is declared concerning a defendant’s competence, all criminal proceedings are suspended until there has been a determination on the defendant’s competence. The court is bound under Penal Code §1368(c) to suspend criminal proceedings until the defendant is determined to be competent. When the criminal proceedings are stopped, all time limitations are suspended as well.

In the case where doubt was declared in the middle of a jury trial, Penal Code §1368(c) instructs the judge to discharge the jury only if it appears to that undue hardship would result if the jury is retained on call.

Though the criminal proceedings have halted, there exist exceptions. In the pending determination of the defendant’s competence, the court is still able to rule on motions to dismiss (including motions made under Penal Code §1385), motions to suppress evidence and demurrers. Additionally, preliminary hearing can be conducted as allowed by Penal Code §1368.1.

Furthermore, under Penal Code 1368(a), the judge must offer the defense counsel an opportunity to state whether counsel believes the defendant to be competent. It is important to note that Evidence Code §954 and current case law makes any opinion rendered on the defendant’s competency not in violation of attorney-client privilege. Though the judge is obligated to extend this opportunity to comment on the defendant’s competency, the counsel need not respond.

And if the defendant was representing himself prior to the declaration of doubt concerning his competence, then he will have to either retain an attorney or the court must appoint him one. The ability to represent yourself is lost when there has been a declaration of doubt.

We hope this gives you some insight on what happens after the court declares a doubt concerning a defendant’s competence. If you or a loved one needs help with a criminal case that may have an issue of competence to stand trial or any other type of criminal defense matter, you need an attorney immediately. Wallin & Klarich has a team of highly skilled and aggressive criminal defense attorneys ready to take your call. Wallin & Klarich has over 30 years of experience defending against criminal prosecution and achieving the best possible results. Call us today at 888-749-0034 or visit us online at www.wklaw.com. We will be there for you when you call.

In a case out of Sacramento, a man was placed on felony probation for a DUI.  One of the terms and conditions of his probation was that he “not drink any alcoholic beverages, possess any alcoholic beverages, or be in any place where it is the chief item of sale”.  The issue was- that this term and condition did not have a qualification that to violate his probation, he must commit the proscribed conduct “knowingly”.  The court raised the point that unlike the term and condition that one must not “knowingly own, use, or possess any deadly or dangerous weapons” the term regarding the alcohol had no “knowingly” qualification.

This becomes important for the probationer in this case.  For instance, if goes with friends to go bowling- and the bowling alley serves alcoholic beverages but the probationer did not know that- his probation officer could not arrest him for violating his probation.

This ruling by the court prevents the probation department from violating a probationer for doing something that they DID not know was in violation of his or her probation.  In a felony case- where being put on probation is the alternative to going to prison- a violation could easily put the probationer in prison.  This would be extremely unjust if the probationer did not know that his or her conduct was in violation.

If you or a loved one have been charged with a Probation Violation contact the experienced Southern California criminal defense attorneys at Wallin & Klarich.  We’ve have been helping criminal defendants for over 30 years.  Call us at (888) 280-6839 or visit us at www.wklaw.com.

An Orange County jury found Christopher Ontiveros, a former high school history teacher at Oxford Academy, not guilty of engaging in sex acts with a 17-year-old female student.  Mr. Ontiveros was charged with three felony counts of sexual penetration of a foreign object of a minor, one felony count of oral copulation of a minor, and one misdemeanor count of contacting a child with the intent to commit a specified crime. If found guilty, Mr. Ontiveros would face a maximum of six years in state prison and lifetime sex-offender registration.

The case began in October 2009 where the student, who was being mentored by Mr. Ontiveros, accused him of sexual penetration and oral copulation in and outside of his classroom from June to September 2009.  Almost two years after the initial allegations, Mr. Ontiveros got his day in court.  Mr. Ontiveros was represented by David R. Cohn of Wallin and Klarich.

During the trial, the prosecution was armed with significant amounts of circumstantial evidence that included sexual explicit text messages found on the female student’s phone and several pictures depicting the student and Mr. Ontiveros.  Mr. Cohn countered these pictures by explaining that the pictures were taken out of context, since the pictures were taken on the last day of school with a classroom full of other students who were waiting to also take pictures with Mr. Ontiveros.

Mr. Ontiveros denied ever sending the girl any text messages.  A forensic examination of Mr. Ontiveros’ phone by police did not turn up any explicit messages sent to the student.  On cross-examination, the student testified that, prior to turning her cell phone over to school administration, she took the time to consciously delete all her text messages from her sent-box. “My theory is that she sent the text messages,”' Cohn said, adding, "No one has ever seen a message in her outbox, only ones in the in box... And there's nothing in his phone that matched up.''

The intense trial, which involved over 30 potential witnesses of police officers, former students and teachers, lasted two weeks and almost two full days of jury deliberations.  Mr. Cohn praised the outcome.  Mr. Ontiveros and his group of many supporters were very emotional and pleased after the verdicts were read.

Yes! Under California Penal Code Section 647(f), “public drunkenness” is a crime of disorderly conduct and is commonly charged as a misdemeanor. In order for the prosecution to convict you of “public drunkenness”, it must prove several elements:

1) that you were willfully under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs,
2) that, at the time you were under the influence, you were in a public place, and
3) you were unable to exercise care for your own safety or for the safety of others, or
4) because of your intoxication, you interfered with, obstructed, or prevented the free use of a sidewalk, street, or other public way.

As to the first element of a PC 647(f) charge, the prosecution must prove that you deliberately ingested alcohol. If someone slipped you a drug or “spiked” your non-alcoholic drink, the law will not consider you to be “willfully” under the influence.

As to the second element, California courts have held that a “public place” for purposes of PC 647(f) is an area outside a home in which a stranger is able to walk without challenge. Some examples of a public place would include restaurants, clubs, shopping malls, parks and public streets. However, courts have also held that a public place may also include a common hallway in an apartment building, a car parked on a public street or in a public lot, and even the area in front of a house, including the driveway, front lawn and front porch. Moreover, courts have held that “public places” are places which are open to common or general use, even if the location isn’t one that the general public frequents. Thus, it doesn’t matter whether you are actually visible to the public, so long as you otherwise meet the elements of the crime. In contrast, courts have held that “private places” include homes, garages, and the inside of hotel rooms.

Finally, the prosecution must prove that you were unable to exercise care for your own safety or for the safety of others, or that you were obstructing the use of a public way. Here, PC 647(f) really addresses persons who are out in public and extremely intoxicated. Some examples would include persons who are falling down drunk, passed out on the sidewalk, or trying to start fights because of their drunken state. Since many people get buzzed or even drunk at California restaurants, nightclubs, concerts, or other public venues, only in the more extreme cases would one’s public intoxication trigger PC 647(f) prosecution. This is because merely being "drunk" in public isn’t a crime. It only becomes criminal when you get inebriated to the point that:
1) You are a safety risk to yourself or others, and/or
2) You are interfering with other people’s right of movement

To ensure that you have the best possible chance of prevailing against the state when your accused of public drunkenness, you need the legal expertise of an aggressive and skilled criminal defense attorney. At Wallin & Klarich, our attorneys have zealously represented our clients on all types of criminal defense matters for over 30 years and can help you achieve the best possible outcome in your matter. Call us today at 1-888-749-0034 or visit us online at www.wklaw.com. We will be there for you when you call.

Almost universally in California; courts will require defendants who are convicted of a DUI in Los Angeles to take a state approved alcohol education course. In addition, the California DMV requires the enrollment in a state approved alcohol education course before a licensee can get their driving privileges back, once they’ve been convicted of a DUI. Below is a summary of the different courses one will have to take; depending upon the circumstances of their conviction, and if they’ve had priors.

• For a first time offender, with Blood Alcohol Concentration of .14% or less; the defendant has to enroll and complete AB 541. AB 541 is a 3 month course which meets once a week for 2 hours.

• For a first time offender, with Blood Alcohol Concentration between .15% and .19%; the defendant has to enroll and complete AB 762. AB 762 is a 6 month course which meets once a week for 2 hours. This program can also be ordered by the court if you were under a .15% BAC, but were involved in a collision when your DUI occurred.

• For a first time offender, with Blood Alcohol Concentration of .20% or more; the defendant has to enroll and complete AB 1353. AB 1353 is a 9 month course which meets once a week for 2 hours.

• For a second or subsequent offender- the court will order you to attend SB 38. SB 38 is an 18 month program that includes group counseling, individual counseling, AA meeting, and bi-weekly interviews.

Having the right lawyer can help in how your case is negotiated. For instance, there are times when a defendant with a .17% BAC can get the ok from the DA to only attend the 3 month AB 541 as opposed to the 6 month AB 762.

If you or a loved one have been charged with a DUI contact the experienced Southern California criminal defense attorneys at Wallin & Klarich. We’ve have been helping criminal defendants for over 30 years. Call us at (888) 280-6839 or visit us at www.wklaw.com.

Existing law, the Sex Offender Registration Act, requires persons who have been convicted of specified sex offenses to register with local law enforcement. Existing law requires that the registration include the person’s address, fingerprints, current photograph, and license plate number. Existing law requires the registrant to update his or her registration annually, upon moving, or upon changing his or her name. Under existing law, failure to register is a crime. Existing law provides that a person who is required to register who willfully violates any requirement of the act is guilty of either a misdemeanor or a felony, as specified.

This bill would additionally require that the registration include a list of all Internet identifiers and service providers, as defined, used by the person. The bill would require the registrant to update this information, as specified. By increasing the scope of a crime, this bill would create a state-mandated local program.
This would include passwords and user names to Facebook, MySpace, emails, Craiglist accounts, etc. It further puts the individual required to register per Penal Code 290 under scrutiny. The state legislator has not yet defined if the bill will apply to all Penal Code 290 registrants, or just ones convicted of certain crimes.

Certain groups such as the ACLU, and other groups have begun to monitor the constitutionality of those bill. Obviously it broadens the instruction law enforcement has on scrutinizing the lives of sex offenders. Other have hailed the bill as needed as many California sex crimes are committed either over the internet, or aided by the internet in that “predators can use it to find their victims” as one CA lawmaker put it. The Southern California Defense Blog will be monitoring this bill as it progresses through the legislator.

If you have any questions, please feel free to call us at 888-749-0034.

The case before the Untied States Supreme Court dealt with whether a 13-year-old boy should have been notified of his “Miranda” rights. Including telling him he need not answer questions before being questioned by police officers. The boy was suspected of committing several burglaries. After first denying any involvement, the minor admitted breaking into several homes and stealing items.

The Untied States Supreme Court’s decision in the Miranda case established that suspects in custody must be advised of various rights, including the right to remain silent before police officers can begin questioning. If Miranda warnings are not given, any statements that the suspect makes to law enforcement may be excluded from evidence.

In California, burglary is codified under Penal Code Section 459. It states in pertinent part that “every person who enters any house… with intent to commit… any felony is guilty of burglary.” Residential burglary is a felony in Califronia, and may result in a strike, if convicted. The punishment for residential burglary in California is up to six years in prison.

If you or a loved one has been arrested, it is imperative you contact our firm. Hiring an experienced criminal defense law firm is the best way to ensure you keep your freedom. The attorneys at Wallin & Klarich have been helping people for over 30 years.

Please feel free to contact Wallin & Klarich to discuss your case. You can reach us 24 hours a day, 7 days a week at 877-466-5245 or go to our website at www.wklaw.com for more information.

If the prosecution cannot establish a solid drinking pattern for a DUI suspect, then any chemical blood alcohol test is subject to interpretation and attack. Hiring an experienced Los Angeles DUI defense attorney, like the attorneys at Wallin & Klarich, is critical.

When trying to establish a DUI suspect's blood alcohol content “at the time of driving” several important factors must be considered:

(A) DUI suspects drinking pattern (usually uncovered by DUI suspect’s admission at the scene of the vehicle stop)
(B) Elapsed Time
(C) Scientific analysis

Many DUI arresting officers insufficiently inquire into a DUI suspect's drinking pattern. If the officer fails to get into the type of detail necessary to counter certain DUI defenses such as rising alcohol defense, a case may be dismissed or reduced for lack of sufficient evidence. Understand that DUI defense requires knowledge of the most current California drunk driving laws and an understanding of science. Many drunk driving defenses will include scientific analysis and review. Make sure the criminal defense attorney you hire understands the ins and outs of DUI defense

If you or a loved one have been accused or charged with DUI in Los Angeles, it is very important that you speak with an experienced criminal defense attorney immediately, like the attorneys at Wallin & Klarich. We have over 30 years of experienced handling this type of matters and can assist you in obtaining the best possible result. Call the law firm of Wallin & Klarich today at, (888) 749-0034 to speak to an experienced criminal defense attorney.

No! In the recent case of People v. Magness, the California Court of Appeal for the Third Appellate District overruled the trial court’s determination that the defendant’s use of a remote control device to open the victim’s garage door with the intent to commit a burglary constituted a burglary under California Penal Code Section 459. The court of appeal held that when a person uses a remote control device to open a garage door from a distance away from the house, with the intent to commit a burglary, the person does not “enter” the house for purposes of the crime of burglary under California law. Under California law, a person commits burglary when he or she enters any house or other building with the intent to commit grand or petit larceny or any felony. A burglary occurs when one’s possessory right in a building has been invaded. Thus, an act of physical entry for the purpose of committing a burglary, no matter how partial or slight it may be, constitutes a burglary under the meaning and intent of California Penal Code Section 459. Moreover, courts have also held that a burglary may be committed when an invader uses an instrument—such as a pair of pliers or a crowbar—to effectuate entry into either a house or other building. However, in the Magness case, the court found that in the absence of any sort of physical intrusion into the victim’s garage, the use of a remote control to effectuate entry, standing alone, will not uphold a burglary conviction.

In the Magness case, the defendant had taken a remote control device from the victim’s car which was parked outside on the victim’s driveway to open up the victim’s garage door. However, before the defendant stepped foot inside of the victim’s garage, the victim came out of the house and confronted the defendant, thereby foiling the defendant’s burglary attempt. The majority reasoned that using a remote control device to open the victim’s garage door was not analogous to either kicking in the door or using a crowbar to effectuate entry (both of which would constitute an “entry”) under California law.

When you retain Wallin & Klarich to defend you from burglary charges, we can argue for a dismissal of the charges based upon many legal theories including the following:

1) That you lacked the intent to commit a burglary.
2) That you did not physically enter the premises (i.e. did not “cross the plane” of the premises with any body part)
3) That you did not use an instrumentality (such as a crowbar) to enter the premises
4) That there is no evidence generally to support the burglary allegations against you.

To ensure that you have the best possible chance of prevailing against the state when you’re being charged with burglary, you need the legal expertise of an aggressive and skilled criminal defense attorney. At Wallin & Klarich, our attorneys have zealously represented our clients facing burglary charges for over 30 years and can help you achieve the best possible outcome in your matter. Call us today at 1-888-749-0034 or visit us online at www.wklaw.com. We will be there for you when you call.

The penalties for violating California's "lewd acts with a minor" law vary, depending on

1. the age of the child (and possibly the age difference between you and the minor), and

2. the specific facts of the case (for example, did the act involve force or violence?), and

3. your criminal history.

If prosecutors charge you with California child molestation when the alleged victim is 14 or 15 years old and you are at least ten years older than the minor, the charge is what's known as a wobbler. A "wobbler" can be filed as either a misdemeanor or as a felony.
The only true difference between misdemeanor and felony sentencing for a "lewd acts with a minor" charge lays in (1) the fine, and (2) the potential jail/prison sentence.
Misdemeanor child molestation subjects you to a maximum one-year county jail sentence and a maximum $1,000 fine. Felony charges subject you to one to eight years in the state prison and a maximum $10,000 fine.
Otherwise, you face the following penalties violating any California Penal Code 288 PC "lewd acts with a minor" law:

-Penal Code 290 PC registration as a sex offender,
-a requirement that you pay for any medical or psychological treatment that the minor incurs as a result of the offense, and
-an additional and consecutive five-year state prison sentence if the minor suffers great bodily injury because you use force or violence during the offense ("great bodily injury" is a significant or substantial physical injury).

It's also important to understand that each independent act of child molestation is a separate offense, punishable as its own violation. This means that if, for example, an individual were to fondle one part of the minor's body...and were to then fondle a different part of the minor's body...prosecutors could charge the perpetrator with two acts of "lewd acts with a child."

If you or a loved one have been charged with “Lewd Acts with a Minor” contact the experienced Southern California criminal defense attorneys at Wallin & Klarich. We’ve have been helping criminal defendants for over 30 years. Call us at (888) 280-6839 or visit us at www.wklaw.com.

Medical Parole- Adds Pen. Code § 2065, and adds Title 2.3 (commencing with § 3550) to Pen. Code Part 3.

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger approved a measure which will allow state prisons to release comatose and physically incapacitated inmates on medical parole. Starting in 2011, the new law will give the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitations the authority to grant medical parole to an inmate who is permanently incapacitated with a medical condition that renders him/her permanently unable to perform activities of basic daily living and requiring 24-hour care.

The option for medical parole includes a screening process to ensure that public safety is not jeopardized by the release of the inmate. Any release would have to be approved by the State Board of Parole Hearings. Prisoners sentenced to death or life in prison without the possibility of parole do not qualify.

A physician employed by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation who is the primary caregiver of the prisoner, can refer the inmate to the Board of Parole Hearings for consideration, provided that the physician believes that the medical criteria are met.

If you or a loved one is currently serving a sentence and believe that medical parole is an option, you should contact the attorneys at Wallin & Klarich immediately. Our attorneys have over 30 years of experience. We have the skill and the knowledge to work with the prisons for this kind of legal matter. The attorneys at Wallin & Klarich can be reached by phone at 1-888-749-0034 or through our website www.wklaw.com.

Murder is quite possibly the most horrendous act any human being is capable of committing. There is not a single developed society in existence that condones the senseless taking of life in a manner that is deliberate and calculated.

For this reason, a murder charge is severely prosecuted. As a capital offense, the penalty for murder can be death or life in prison without the possibility of parole.

How can a DUI lead to Murder?

In California, a drunk driver can be prosecuted as a murderer, even if the resulting death was unintended or purely accidental. This particular type of murder is called a Watson Murder.

Named after the court case that first introduced the concept, a Watson Murder is prosecuted when a person with a prior DUI conviction drives under the influence again and it results in the death of another person.

Instead of it being prosecuted as a manslaughter offense (a killing that is committed by accident), a Watson Murder will incur a second-degree murder charge.

Second-degree murder is normally punishable by imprisonment in state prison for 15 years to life. Although a harsh punishment, it does not approach the possibility of death by execution.

Needless to say, you do not want the possibility of a Watson Murder charge looming over your head. If you are facing a DUI allegation, it is important that you seek the expertise of a skilled criminal defense attorney. At Wallin & Klarich, our attorneys have been in practice for over 30 years and can help you avoid harsh prison sentences. Call us today at 888-749-0034 or visit us online at www.wklaw.com. We will be there for you when you call.

Assmebly Bill 2372 Penal Code Section 487 amended
This law changes the threshold from $400 to $950 to charge the crime of grand theft for stealing money, labor, real or personal property.

Existing law generally provides that grand theft is theft when the money, labor, or real or personal property taken is of a value exceeding $400. This law increases the value threshold for committing grand theft from $400 to $950.  Grand theft is considered a wobbler. 


When the case is a wobbler, the District attorney has discretion in making a determination as to what degree a case should be charged. Some charges can be brought as felonies, while the same conduct could be brought as a misdemeanor.  The amount of loss, injuries to the victim, past criminal conduct, or lack thereof, on behalf of the accused, are just some of the factors that would allow the district attorney to use discretion in making a charging determination in a particular case.

If you or a loved one is facing a grand theft charge, contact the california theft attorneys at Wallin and Klarich. We at Wallin and Klarich have many years of experience successfully defending people charged with theft. We will work to aggressively defend you by investigating all aspects of your case. We will work to ensure that your rights are protected and that you clearly understand the legal process. The attorneys at Wallin & Klarich can be reached by phone at 1-877-230-1529 or through our website at www.wklaw.com. We will be there when you call.

The right to appeal in a criminal case is conferred and defined by statute. (California Penal Code 1237) Appeal is initiated by filing a notice of appeal with the Clerk of the Superior Court within 60 days from rendition of the judgment or challenged order. The appeal must be taken from a final judgment, which is defined to include an order granting probation, insanity commitment, mentally disordered commitment, or an addiction commitment. The defendant may file a general notice of appeal, simply appealing from the judgment following a jury or court trial or a contested probation revocation. This notice does not require any specification of issues and counsel on appeal is not limited by any designation of issues by trial counsel.

If appellate counsel discerns a defect in the notice of appeal or the absence of a certificate of probable cause, the problem must be immediately addressed. If it is less than 60 days since the imposition of judgment, counsel can file an amended notice of appeal or an application for a certificate of probable cause. If it is too late to proceed in the trial court, relief from default must be sought in the Court of Appeal.

The appeals process can be lengthy and complex. Without the aid and knowledge of an experienced appeals attorney, the whole undertaking can be overwhelming. Our appellate lawyers at Wallin & Klarich have over 30 years of experience handling difficult appeals cases and will work diligently to file a timely appeal that will help you overturn your conviction. Call us today at 888-749-0034 or visit us online at www.wklaw.com. We will be there for you when you call.

The OC Register is reporting by Erika Ritchie, that earlier this week in Lake Forest, California, Orange County deputies responded to a call regarding a possible battery that occurred on Monday at the Chevron gas station off Bridger Road. The alleged victim said he had been hit in the face and his car had been kicked by two individuals who were apparently upset with his driving. The alleged victim stated that he had paused in the road way before making a turn into the gas station. That's when he was approached by two individuals, one of which kicked his car and then punched him in the head. The two individuals fled in their vehicle. Police are looking for any witnesses.

A battery is defined by the California Penal code as, any willful and unlawful use of force or violence upon the person of another and is punishable by a fine not exceeding two thousand dollars ($2,000), or by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding six months, or by both that fine and imprisonment.

If you or a loved one is facing a charge of battery, contact the criminal defense attorneys at Wallin and Klarich. We at Wallin and Klarich have many years of experience successfully defending people charged with these types of crimes. We will work to aggressively defend you by investigating all aspects of your case. We will work to ensure that your rights are protected and that you clearly understand the legal process. The attorneys at Wallin & Klarich can be reached by phone at 1-877-230-1529 or through our website at www.wklaw.com. We will be there when you call.

The answer to this question is yes in certain specific circumstances. Under current law, a criminal defendant has the right under the United States Constitution to confront those who testify against them. In other words, if a person accuses you of a crime, you have the right to confront that person in court. Therefore, accuser’s statements against you can not be allowed in court, unless the accuser is present and subject to cross examination.

However an exception to this general rule is whether the primary purpose of the accuser’s statement was to assist law enforcement in dealing with an ongoing emergency; rather than, for investigative purposes. For example, if a person is shot and is laying on the floor dying and the police officers arrive and ask him if he’s okay, and the victim responds with "John just shot me and he ran towards the parking lot, please stop him," this will be characterized as a statement dealing with an ongoing emergency. If the victim later died and John is on trial for murder, the victim’s last statements stating that John shot him would come in as evidence against John because the victim’s statements were dealing with an ongoing emergency; the emergency was that a gunman was on the loose. Therefore, John would not have the ability to confront his accuser, since the victim is now dead, but the statements by the victim would come in as evidence against John to convict him of murder.

On the other hand, imagine that the victim was shot by John and the victim survived. Two days later the victim went to the police and during a police interview the victim stated "John shot me and he ran towards the parking lot to escape." If the victim were to die the next day from an infection caused by his gun shot wound, the victim’s statements would not be allowed in court against John. That’s because the victim’s statements were for purposes of an ongoing investigation and not dealing with an ongoing emergency. In this case, the victim’s statements would not be admitted in court, unless, John had the right to confront the victim and cross examine the victim at his criminal trial. However, since the victim has died, the victim is not available to come to court and the statements can not be used against John to convict him.

As such, it is extremely important that you have an experienced criminal defense attorney who can exclude these damaging statements against you at trial. If you or a loved one is charged with a crime, you should contact our experienced defense attorneys at Wallin and Klarich. We have been protecting the rights of individuals accused of crimes for over three decades. You can call us at 1-877-466-5245, we will be there when you call.

The Innocence Project at Santa Clara University School Of Law, found 130 instances of misconduct perpetrated by prosecutors in California. According to the study, the 130 instances of misconduct occurred in 102 criminal cases.

According to the study, of the all the instances of misconduct, only 18 instances of misconduct resulted in reversals of convictions. In many cases, the courts upheld convictions because they claimed the misconduct did not affect the fairness of the trial.

The study brings attention to the continued need to scrutinize the conduct and actions of California prosecutors. The number of cases involving prosecutorial misconduct is relatively small compared to the vast number of cases that are prosecuted every year.

If you or a loved one has been arrested, it is imperative you contact our firm. Hiring an experienced criminal defense law firm is the best way to ensure you keep your freedom. The attorneys at Wallin & Klarich have been helping people for over 30 years.

Please feel free to contact Wallin & Klarich to discuss your case. You can reach us 24 hours a day, 7 days a week at 877-466-5245 or go to our website at www.wklaw.com for more information.

The California Courts of Appeal, 3rd District, ruled that a defendant who qualifies for deferred entry of judgment cannot then be removed from it simply because the defendant is unable to pay the fees for the diversion programs.The defendant in the case, Anita Trask, faced criminal charges that included possession of methamphetamine. She entered a "no contest" plea to the possession charge and was granted deferred entry of judgment (diversion) pursuant to Penal Code Section 1000.

For non-violent drug possession convictions, the judge can suspend the conviction, or defer the judgment, to allow the defendant time to attend a drug rehabilitation program. Upon the successful completion of the program, the judge will dismiss the case entirely. In this way, the defendant can avoid incurring a drug conviction on his/her criminal record.

Trask, however, could not attend the drug diversion program that she had been assigned because she could not afford the program’s intake fee or its monthly payments. Although the trial court acknowledged Trask’s inability to pay, it did not provide any free programs or approved alternatives. As a result, criminal proceedings were reinstated and Trask was placed on formal probation for three years and a 60-day jail sentence.

On appeal, the appellate court reversed the trial court’s ruling on the grounds that deferred entry of judgment may not be terminated solely because the defendant was unable to pay for the diversion program. In reaching this decision, the court stated that Section 1000 explicitly provides ground for termination of diversion only when:

1. The defendant is performing unsatisfactorily in the assigned program,


2. The defendant is not benefiting from the treatment, OR


3. The defendant has been convicted of a misdemeanor that indicates a violent propensity or unsuitability for deferred entry of judgment.

 

In Trask’s case, she was never given the opportunity to even perform unsatisfactorily in the program, and nothing in the facts indicate that she had violated any other requirement under the code section. The termination, therefore, was improper.

The ability to enter a drug diversion program is extremely valuable because it gives you the opportunity to avoid a criminal conviction. It is therefore imperative that you seek the legal guidance of an experienced drug defense attorney who can arrange to have you entered into such programs. Our attorneys at Wallin & Klarich have been representing clients in drug possession matters for over 30 years. Call us today at 888-749-0034 or visit us online at www.wklaw.com. We will be there for you when you call.

One can only hope to never be charged with a Federal crime. But if you are, Federal
crimes carry much harsher sentences than State Court. Why?

1. Federal statutes have harsher and tougher sentencing laws than State statutes on
crimes that can be filed in State or Federal Court.

2. Generally, the maximum punishment for Federal crimes is much higher.

3. Federal prosecutors have much less discretion in negotiating plea bargains.

4. Federal judges have much less discretion in sentencing decisions.

5. Federal judges must follow strict sentencing guidelines procured by the Federal
legislature.

6. Federal crimes carry stringent punishment enhancements for most every crime.

For example, in a possession of child pornography case, where the punishment is severe
to begin with, the ultimate sentence can be increased for many additional reasons that
seem to be an inherent part of the underlying crime. For example:

•

Use of the computer

•

The exact number of images

•

The exact age of the children in the images

•

If the images are sadistic or masochistic

•

Video file vs. a photo image

•

If the images involve sexual exploitation or abuse

•

Relationship of the defendant to the minor

So, it is not as simple as being charged with a crime and being punished it. In Federal
Court, your sentence will be negatively affected by many more factors that may not seem
fair or just.

To navigate through the Federal Court system successfully, you must contact Wallin &
Klarich to help you or your loved one. With over 30 years of experience as Federal Law
Sentencing attorneys, Wallin & Klarich will assist you in this difficult time. Visit our
website at www.wklaw.com or call us at 888-749-0034. We will be there when you call.

.

The atmosphere and energy in a typical Southern California Veterans Court is measurably different than that of a standard criminal courtroom. It is not uncommon to hear loud cheers and applause coming from those courtrooms designed specifically for veterans facing criminal charges. Veterans courts bring together social service providers, veterans specialists, prosecutors, and defense lawyers in a non-adversarial process to tailor a service plan to a defendant's particular needs. The veterans court model is designed to offer treatment rather than incarceration to criminal offenders who have served in the military.

Veterans courts are becoming more readily available for local California courts to address the growing number of veterans in the criminal justice system. In California, counties including Orange, Los Angeles, Tulare, and Ventura have joined the veterans court movement – San Diego hopes to open a veterans court sometime this year. Recent U.S. Department of Justice statistics show that approximately 140,000 veterans were inmates in state and federal prisons in 2004. In addition, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and traumatic brain injuries (TBI) are leading factors contributing to new law violations for many veterans.

The inspiration behind veterans courts is an understanding that for many veterans incarceration is unlikely to treat substance abuse or mental illness. Veterans court provides specific treatment plans and court supervision with an eye towards treatment and rehabilitation, rather than incarceration.

If you have any questions at all about Veterans Court please contact Wallin & Klarich. At Wallin & Klarich we have helped people accused of criminal offenses for over 30 years. Call us today at (888) 749-7428 or visit us at our website at www.wklaw.com. We will be there when you call.

Marijuana possession is a crime in California, except if you are medically prescribed marijuana and you used and possess it consistent with state and local law.

California protects the list of medical marijuana patients for patient confidentiality reasons. For instance, an employer could not normally check whether a potential or existing employee is being treated for an STD, because that would be an unacceptable intrusion on a person’s right to privacy.

But that’s not the end of the issue. Your employer may require you to submit to random drug tests as a condition of employment, in which case you must disclose your medical marijuana use or risk being fired once you test positive. Once you disclose your medical marijuana use, it is up to the employer to decide whether to fire or decline to hire you, because California courts have held that employers CAN legally discriminate against medical marijuana users.

Also, note that marijuana cultivation and sale is still illegal under federal law. While this does not directly affect the individual patient, medical marijuana dispensaries and co-ops may be subject to federal raids, and any patient information will be confiscated. Although President Barack Obama has stated that the federal government will not raid marijuana dispensaries that operate consistent with state law, the threat of a federal raid is a constant concern, especially if your dispensary cultivates and sells a high volume of marijuana. Thus, if the dispensary is ever raided, the personal information you submitted to the dispensary will be in government hands and you may be investigated further.

If you are arrested for marijuana possession but have a valid prescription for medical marijuana, call a seasoned Southern California drug crime attorney. Medical marijuana prescriptions have helped many patients ease their pain, but you also risk certain consequences, including the increased likelihood of arrest and scrutiny by your employer. That’s why you need a good Southern California drug crime lawyer to explain these issues to you.

If you have been accused of a drug crime, you will need a seasoned Southern California criminal defense lawyer to help you through these proceedings. At Wallin & Klarich, we have helped accused of drug crimes for over 30 years. Call us today at (888) 280-6839 or visit us at our website at www.wklaw.com. We will be there when you call.

Your Wallin & Klarich appeals attorney will obtain and thoroughly review a transcript of your trial to determine what legal errors were made. Such errors include the wrongful admission or exclusion of evidence, jury instructional error, or jury misconduct. Additional investigation may be necessary to uncover the evidence needed to prove such errors. Then, a written brief will be prepared which all such issues and justifications for reversal are presented and argued, supported by legal authority and the declarations of additional witnesses.

Constructing a comprehensive case of appellate issues increases the chances that a judge might grant a new trial because the motion is based on a variety of issues. Raising all pertinent issues at this stage assures that the client's best defense is presented and that those points are preserved for federal court review should that be required at a later date.

The appeals process can be a highly complex process. Without the aid and knowledge of an experienced appeals attorney, the whole undertaking can be overwhelming. Our appellate lawyers at Wallin & Klarich have over 30 years of experience handling difficult appeals cases and will work diligently to file a timely appeal that will help you overturn your conviction. Call us today at 888-749-0034 or visit us online at www.wklaw.com. We will be there for you when you call.