Southern California Defense Blog

I guess green beer and corned beef and cabbage are a thing of the past.

The web site The Smoking Gun recently reported that, on March 17, 2008, Ohio law enforcement officers seized crack cocaine that had been dyed green as the Emerald Isle itself – in honor of St. Patrick’s Day.

This is not the first time that narcotics officers had seen crack cocaine dyed for festive purposes. One of the Ohio officers noted that some dealers had dyed their supply red during the Christmas season.

With more than 30 years of experience defending clients facing drug charges in California, we have the skills and knowledge to help you get the best outcome. Call us today for a free evaluation of your case.

At Wallin & Klarich we approach every case with the attitude that the person we are defending could be one of our own family members. We know the stress and strain that drug cases can cause to a person and their family. We are here to help answer your questions 7 days a week, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.

Posted by Wallin & Klarich | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Drug Offenses

Bookmark:

Usually if someone over 18 is caught smoking weed with someone under 18, they will be charged with the misdemeanor crime of contributing to the delinquency of a minor.

However lately the District Attorney’s office has been choosing to punish the exact same act with felony consequences. The same act of contributing to the delinquency of a minor can also be charged as a felony, Health and Safety code 11361 (b)(1) which is furnishing Marijuana to a minor. The code says that if someone is found to administer, furnish, sell, or offer to furnish, administer, or sell marijuana to someone under the age of 18, they will face felony charges.

Furthermore the minimum sentence to this charge is 3 years. This means smoking a small joint with your kid brother or sister could land you in jail for 3 years, and that is only the minimum sentence.

Posted by Wallin & Klarich | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Drug Offenses

Bookmark:

A recent opinion by the California Court of Appeals has ruled that it is an UNLAWFUL SEARCH AND SEIZURE when law enforcement sees a person smoking marijuana in their apartment and then enters the apartment and finds evidence of other drug crimes. The “evidence” that the officers seized during the search was held to be illegal.

The court of appeals stated that since possession of marijuana of less than one ounce is a “non jailable offense” the police could not enter the property for the purpose of arresting the defendants or search their apartment. The charges against the defendant were dismissed.

If you are facing Orange County criminal charges it is critical that your lawyers are knowledgeable about every law and every case that can result in winning your case. At Wallin & Klarich we stay on top of all recent changes in the law so that our clients get the best possible outcome in their case. Contact Wallin & Klarich 24/7 to discuss your case.
--

Posted by Wallin & Klarich | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Drug Offenses

Bookmark:

Facts:

The defendant was involved in a traffic collision and was injured in the collision. The other party involved in the collision was killed and defendant was charged with gross vehicular manslaughter and convicted at trial. He appealed the conviction on the grounds that the police officer that testified at trial was not qualified to rely on the toxicology report in rendering his opinion that he was under the influence of drugs while operating a motor vehicle and there was insufficient evidence that he was under the influence of a drug for purposes of gross vehicular manslaughter.

Officers interviewed the defendant at the hospital and he could not explain how the accident occurred, stating “I was driving down the road one minute. . . and the next minute I was in an accident. Def admitted to taking ambient at 9:00 a.m. and the accident occurred at 9:20 a.m.. A forensic toxicologist testified that Ambien is a “very strong depressant” that is rapidly eliminated from the body and does not build up over time. According to the manufacturer of Ambien, it remains in the system for eight hours. The window of detection of Ambien is “very limited” and the “effects of the drug are very strong through that whole window.” The observable effects of Ambien include drowsiness, poor coordination, poor judgment, and slurred speech.

Continue reading "People v. Merlen, CA 3rd district, Case No. C051678, unpublished opinion has very good material regarding expert testimony re use of ambient and DUI." »

Posted by Wallin & Klarich | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: DUI & Drunk Driving , Drug Offenses

Bookmark:

So you got caught with drugs. You’re already anxious about your court date. Am I going to get jail time? What am I going to do about work? Will they fire me? Well, rather than overwhelming yourself with all sorts of hypothetical scenarios, consult with an attorney and find out what you’re actually facing. Most felony drug possession charges carry a sentence range of 16 months, 2 years, or 3 years. If it’s a misdemeanor, then you could face only a maximum of 1 year in county jail. But the thought of any jail time freaks you out.

Chances are that you will be eligible for PC 1000. Assuming your possession offense in not coupled with a violent crime, you may be eligible for PC 1000 diversion. In other words, instead of doing jail/prison time, you could do drug counseling program. Depending on the program, you may have to complete 3-6 months or 1 year of drug treatment and education. Moreover, upon completion of the same and almost 1-2 yrs after pleading guilty to the drug offense, you may withdraw your guilty plea and replace it with a not guilty plea. How do you know you’re PC 1000 eligible? Well, it’s completely up to you. Call Wallin & Klarich today at 888.280.6839 to find out if you are eligible.

Posted by Wallin & Klarich | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Drug Offenses

Bookmark:

The law firm of Wallin & Klarich has been defending those charged with possession of marijuana for over 27 years. Whether it be cultivating, transporting or selling marijuana, our law firm has been successful in defending against these charges. The new medical marijuana laws allow flexibility and some “wiggle room” in the way these cases get prosecuted. The staff attorneys at Wallin & Klarich are familiar with the laws of medical marijuana use and care giving (11362.5 Health and Safety Code to 11362.9 Health and Safety Code). If you or a loved one is arrested for marijuana, you need to call a drug crime defense lawyer at the law firm of Wallin & Klarich and see how we can help you win your case.

Posted by Wallin & Klarich | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Drug Offenses

Bookmark:

If you ever wondered why you need a skilled criminal defense attorney when facing a serious criminal charge, you no longer have to wonder. About two weeks ago in Los Angeles County a lawyer was on trial for attempting to smuggle drugs into the LA County jail to give to his client.

The defendant attorney had as his defense that he had “low blood sugar” that day which made him light headed. He claimed that due to this “medical condition” he did not think to check the package that he was handed by his client’s family member before taking it into the jail with him. The lawyer stated he believed that he was bringing his client family photos.

Continue reading "Lawyer found not guilty for carrying drugs into jail while visiting his client who was accused of a drug offense" »

Posted by Wallin & Klarich | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Drug Offenses

Bookmark:

The police cannot enter your home to seize your property without a search warrant. While there are certain specific exceptions to this rule in most cases the police must ask a judge for a warrant to search your home before they can enter.

A citizen has a right to refuse to have the police enter their home without a search warrant. This applies to homeowners and renters as well. It is almost always a very bad idea to give law enforcement permission to search your home without first obtaining a warrant.

In a recent case the police had strong evidence that inside a home there was a very large amount of heroin. The police decided that the occupants of the home might destroy the evidence if they did not enter the home immediately. They did not get a search warrant. They did not get permission to search.

Continue reading "Six Million Dollar Heroin Arrest Dismissed for Failure to Get Search Warrant" »

Posted by Wallin & Klarich | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Drug Offenses

Bookmark:

A recent decision of the Court of Appeals held that a defendant was wrongfully accused of possession of methamphetamines, a felony. The substance was found on a nightstand in a bedroom that the accused shared with his girlfriend. The District Attorney did not present any evidence to prove that the defendant knew the substance was methamphetamines. The defendant denied he knew the substance was a drug of any kind. The defendant was found guilty by the jury.

The Court of Appeals ruled that an accused cannot be found guilty of the crime merely because the drugs are found in a room he sleeps in. There must be evidence to proof he knew the substance was illegal.

In many cases drugs are found in a car that is occupied by a driver and many passengers. The police often arrest many or all of the occupants of the vehicle. It is very important your lawyer know the law and these recent case. It can be the difference between you being found guilty or not guilty of the crime.

If you find yourself arrested of a drug offense you need to speak to an experienced criminal defense firm who can help you protect your legal rights. Feel free to call Wallin and Klarich at 888-280-6839. We can make the difference between jail and freedom.

Posted by Wallin & Klarich | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Drug Offenses

Bookmark:

There is a misconception that almost all drug cases are eligible for diversion through Penal Code 1000 and Proposition 36. Although it is possible to divert these offenses by completing certain drug classes and by subjecting yourself to random testing by the probation department, you will not be eligible for diversion if the offense is coupled with driving under the influence.

If charged with possession of narcotics and Driving Under the Influence, you may get the mandatory minimum (90 days) in jail. Keep in mind however, that the 90 days is only a guideline. The court or the district attorney has the discretion to impose more jail time.

What to do when encountered with this type of dilemma? Hire an attorney and retain the best experts to help you to retest the blood or urine sample. Hundreds of cases have been dismissed as a result of retesting. Reliable experts may be able to testify that the amount or residue of drugs in your system was not sufficient to impair your driving skills. Such testimony may not only be admissible in courts, but it could also save your driver’s license.

Posted by Wallin & Klarich | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: DUI & Drunk Driving , Drug Offenses

Bookmark:

In November 2000, California voters approved Proposition 36 (Prop 36) in a landside vote. Under Prop 36, nonviolent drug offenders are diverted from jail or prison sentences in favor of rehabilitation programs. Basically, they are given three shots at completing rehab in an attempt to kick their drug addictions.

Since Judges cannot send these nonviolent drug offenders to prison or jail unless they fail to complete the Prop 36 rehabilitation program more than three times, critics of Prop 36 argue that it unfairly ties the hands of judges and allows drug offenders to take advantage of the program. Critics argue that it allows drug offenders a free pass, meaning that under Prop 36 there is no real punishment for them. That drug offenders know they will be diverted instead of going to jail and that if they fail to complete the drug offender programs there will be more opportunities to complete them.

A recent study found that more than 25% of drug offenders sentenced under Prop 36 never show up to their rehabilitation program and nearly 50% of offenders do not complete the program. Moreover, a study funded by the State of California and conducted by researchers at UCLA found that drug offenders are more likely to be arrested on new drug charges than before Prop 36 was even passed. The study found that roughly 50% of drug offenders have been rearrested since Prop 36 was passed compared to just 38.1% before it was passed.

In the other hand, according to the study, Prop 36 has saved Californians $2.50 for every $1.00 spent and has significantly reduced the load on California’s state prisons. Moreover, proponents of Prop 36 argue that it still allows those drug offenders who truly want help in kicking their drug addictions get that help instead of rotting away in prison and/or jail. They point to the UCLA study that found that 59% of offenders who completed the rehabilitation programs had found jobs one year after they had been sentenced and 78% of them announced that were now drug free.

Continue reading "Prop 36: Does it Give Offenders a Free Pass?" »

Posted by Wallin & Klarich | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Drug Offenses

Bookmark: