Southern California Defense Blog

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

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

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

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

Posted by Wallin & Klarich | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Criminal Appeals

Bookmark:

An attorney was recently disbarred from the practice of law by the California State Bar for his failure to properly defend a client in a robbery trial.

At the defendants first trial the lawyer called an expert witness who testified as to the unreliability of eyewitness testimony. In addition during the first trial the lawyer called several witnesses to support the defendants alibi as well as to the lack of motive for the defendant to commit the crime. The jury was unable to reach a verdict at the end of the first trial.

At the retrial on the same charges the California criminal defense attorney failed to call the expert witness and failed to call to the stand many of the key witnesses who testified for the defense at the first trial. The defendant was found guilty at the conclusion of the second trial.

Continue reading "CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY DISBARRED FOR FAILURE TO PROPERLY REPRESENT DEFENDANT IN HIS ROBBERY TRIAL RESULTING IN HIS CONVICTION " »

Posted by Wallin & Klarich | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Criminal Appeals

Bookmark:

If you or a loved one has been convicted of a criminal offense, you should consider appealing the case. The law on criminal appeals in California is specific and deadlines are important to understand. On felony cases, the Notice of Appeal needs to be filed within 60 calendar days of sentence. On misdemeanors, the time to file the Notice of Appeal is 30 days from the day of sentencing. Failure to follow such deadlines can result in you losing your right to appeal. The law firm of Wallin & Klarich has been assisting clients with their appeals for the past 27 years. Our criminal lawyers have been successful in filing appeals for our clients in all state and federal courts. Appeals can be time consuming and expensive. If you are interested in getting a “case review” to determine the chances of such an appeal, or want to discuss what your options are, call the law firm of Wallin & Klarich anytime. This could be your last chance at freedom and all issues need to be considered.

Posted by Wallin & Klarich | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Criminal Appeals

Bookmark:

The California Court of Appeal recently reversed a plea agreement because there was not an adequate factual basis for the defendant’s plea. The issue in The People v. Bobby Lee Willard was whether a general stipulation, without reference to a document in the record which contains factual allegations, satisfies the proper procedure when a negotiated plea is taken.

When a negotiated plea is taken and the trial court asks defense counsel about the factual basis, the court should request that counsel stipulate to a particular document that provides an adequate factual basis.

Continue reading "There must be an adequate factual basis in the record to accept a plea" »

Posted by Wallin & Klarich | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Criminal Appeals

Bookmark:

In a recent case a defendant was found guilty of making terrorist threats to his former girlfriend. Even though the former girlfriend did not come to court to testify the trial judge allowed a police officer to come to court and testify as to what the former girlfriend had told him about the threats the defendant had allegedly made to her. The defendant was found guilty after a jury trial. The trial judge sentenced the defendant to nine years in state prison.

The defendant appealed his conviction to the California courts. However, all his appeals were denied. Finally he hired an experienced criminal defense attorney and that lawyer filed a writ of habeas corpus petition in the federal court. The FEDERAL COURT OF APPEALS REVERSED THE CONVICTION and granted the writ of habeas corpus. The federal court ordered that the defendant be granted a new trial or in the alternative that the case be dismissed and the defendant be freed.

Continue reading "UNLAWFUL ADMISSION OF TESTIMONY LEADS TO REVERSAL OF CONVICTION ON APPEAL BY FEDERAL COURT EVEN THOUGH ALL OF THE CALIFORNIA COURTS TURNED DOWN THE APPEAL, FEDERAL COURT GRANTS NEW TRIAL AFTER WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS FILED" »

Posted by Wallin & Klarich | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Criminal Appeals

Bookmark:

A defendant was found guilty of beating his elderly grandfather to death in 2005. The defendant was sentenced to prison for life. A California Court of Appeal has reversed his conviction and granted him a new trial on the basis that the prosecution failed to turn over a tape recording made of the defendant when he was arrested.

It appears that the defendant’s trial lawyer did not seek discovery of this tape. The court of appeals held that the DA’s office had an obligation to turn the tape over to the defendant even absent a formal request. The defendant’s appellate lawyer successfully convinced the court of appeal that if the jury had heard this tape recording it could have resulted in a different verdict.

The lawyer that you hire to defend you has to aggressively seek all possible discoveries from the prosecution. You need a law firm like Wallin & Klarich on your side that has tremendous experience in filing all necessary motions. Our firm will make sure all the evidence is received from the prosecution to allow us to properly defend you. If you would like a consultation with an experienced Wallin & Klarich lawyer contact us at 888-280-6839. We can make the difference between jail and freedom.

Posted by Wallin & Klarich | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Criminal Appeals

Bookmark:

-- Information for Appellants --
This information will help explain what an appeal is about. It answers some of the general questions most often asked by our clients. Your individual attorney will help you understand your specific case.

“WHAT IS AN APPEAL?”
An appeal is not a new trial. The purpose of an appeal is to check over the proceedings in the trial court to see if the law was followed. An appeal can deal only with the matter shown in the “record.” The “record” includes only: (1) the papers in the trial court files and (2) a court reporter’s word-for-word record of what happened in the courtroom. The Court of Appeal cannot consider facts outside the transcripts. It hears no witnesses and takes no new evidence. The Court of Appeal has no power to decide “questions of fact,” such as whether you are guilty or innocent, or whether a certain witness was lying, or what a particular piece of evidence proves. Decisions like those are made only by the jury or trial judge. The Court of Appeal has no power to say what sentence you should get as long as the sentence you actually received is one allowed by law. The Court of Appeal cannot simply change it because it does not agree with it. The Court of Appeal deals with legal questions. It decides whether the trial court proceedings followed the law. For example, it might decide whether certain evidence was correctly admitted, whether the jury was properly instructed, or whether the trial judge gave adequate reasons for choosing a particular sentence, and other questions of those types. If the Court of Appeal finds that the proceedings were conducted correctly, the judgment is “affirmed,” which means your conviction and sentence will not change. Even if the Court of Appeal finds a legal error was made in the trial court, your judgment will be affirmed unless the court finds “prejudice” – that the error made a difference in the trial. If there is “error” and “prejudice” your case will be “reversed” (in part or in full) and sent back to the trial court for a new trial, a new sentencing, or some other proceeding to correct the error. Some mistakes can be corrected by the Court of Appeal itself, without sending the case back.

Continue reading "UNDERSTANDING YOUR APPEAL" »

Posted by Wallin & Klarich | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Criminal Appeals

Bookmark: