Southern California Defense Blog

It was recently reported that authorities are looking for two groups of men that got into a fight which left one man with stab wounds to his body. Authorities reported that a verbal altercation broke out between the groups around 11:30 p.m. inside a T.G.I. Friday's restaurant. The argument precipitated into a violent exchange that spilled into the parking lot. During the brawl, one man revealed a handgun and another had a knife. The man stabbed was taken to a hospital and is in critical but stable condition. Police are still searching for the man who stabbed the victim, who will be charged with attempted murder.

Under California Penal Code Section 21a, an attempt to commit a crime consists of 2 requirements: a specific intent to commit the crime and a direct but ineffectual act done toward its commission. In addition, under California Penal Code Section 187, murder is defined as the killing of a person with malice aforethought. First degree murder is defined as any murder perpetrated by willful or deliberate or by means of a destructive device or by premeditation. See California Penal Code Section 189. Second degree murder is any other kind of murder. On the other hand, if the killing was in self defense or by accident, then he or she may be charged with second degree murder or manslaughter (See Penal Code Section 192).

In addition, punishment for first degree murder is a felony punishable by death, imprisonment in the state prison for life without the possibility of parole, or imprisonment in the state prison for a term of 25 years to life. Every person guilty of murder in the second degree shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for a term of 15 years to life.

If you or a loved one is facing attempted murder charges or any other serious homicide crime, contact our Southern California attorneys at Wallin and Klarich. Wallin & Klarich will help protect your rights and find the best defense strategy for your case. For over 30 years, our attorneys have been helping clients get accused of serious and violent crimes. Please call us at (888) 280-6839 or visit our website at www.wklaw.com. We will be there when you call.

It’s almost never the case in incidents involving involuntary manslaughter that the defendant had intended to kill the victim, but unfortunately a death does in fact occur under the circumstances – even in the absence of any murderous intent. Consequently, the defendant will still face involuntary manslaughter charges as long as the killing was the result of the defendant’s own wrongful conduct or recklessness.

Under California Penal Code Section 192(b), involuntary manslaughter is the unlawful killing that results from an improper use of reasonable care or skill while performing a lawful act, or while committing an act that is unlawful but also not felonious.

To illustrate involuntary manslaughter charges stemming from the failure to exercise reasonable care or skill while performing a lawful act, consider the allegations against Dr. Conrad Murray, who had been Michael Jackson’s personal physician. Murray is charged with involuntary manslaughter for causing the death of the beloved pop star by allegedly treating his insomnia with lethal doses of a powerful anesthetic called propofol.

The issue will revolve around whether administering such a large dose would demonstrate an extreme lack of reasonable care or skill (criminal negligence) on the part of Dr. Murray. Although there is nothing inherently illegal about a doctor administering drugs to a patient, it could be the basis for involuntary manslaughter if it was done in a manner that was drastically unreasonable.

The punishment for involuntary manslaughter include imprisonment for up to four years in state prison. It may also include fines of up $10,000.

Fortunately, there are viable defenses that can help reduce the penalties or dismiss the charge altogether. An experienced criminal defense attorney can formulate and assert these defenses on your behalf. Depending on the facts of your case, your attorney may argue the reasonableness of your actions given the circumstances or claim that the killing was a justifiable homicide (e.g., self-defense, defense of others, etc.).

If you would like learn more about involuntary manslaughter and the options that are available to you if find yourself charged of this crime, visit our website at www.wklaw.com and read our “Involuntary Manslaughter” section.

At Wallin & Klarich, our attorneys have over 30 years of experience in handling involuntary manslaughter cases. They will meticulously analyze the facts of your case and zealously represent your interests to achieve the best possible results. Call us today at 888-749-0034 or visit us online at www.wklaw.com. We will be there when you call.

It was recently reported that a missing 11-year-old Chatsworth boy was found safe after being reported missing the night before. Cody Burton went missing at 6:40 on a Sunday night after taking out the trash. He did not return to his apartment complex and did not have contact with his mother the rest of the night. Burton’s mother called the police when her son did not return, fearing he had been kidnapped. The next day, it was learned that he had walked to a friend’s house in Woodland Hills and spent the night. The boy is believed to be safe and unharmed. There is no evidence that a kidnap took place.

Kidnapping in California is regulated by California Penal Code Section 207, which defines kidnapping as the use of force or fear to take a person and move him or her a substantial distance. The punishment for a kidnapping conviction in California is up to eight years of state prison, which can increase if there was injury or abuse to the victim, if the victim was a child, or if the kidnapping was done to facilitate another crime.

If you or a loved one has been accused of kidnapping, it is important that you talk to an experienced criminal defense attorney. At Wallin & Klarich, our attorneys have over 30 years of experience in handling all types of criminal matters. Our attorneys will work with you to present the best possible defense for your case. Call us today at (888) 280-6839 or visit us on our website at www.wklaw.com. We will be there when you call.

It was recently reported that Roosevelt Dorn, a longtime fixture in the Los Angeles legal community and Mayor of Inglewood, plead guilty to a conflict of interest charge in connection with an Inglewood loan program. Just hours after entering his plea, he resigned from his mayoral position.

Dorn was charged with misusing a housing loan program designed to help municipal employees afford housing in the area. He allegedly helped create the program, approved it, and had a financial stake in it. Police claim that Dorn took $500,000 from the program and spent half of it paying the mortgage on his house and deposited the rest in his bank account. Reports claim he paid the sum back to the city after it became politically controversial.

Dorn has been an attorney in Inglewood since the 1970’s. In the 1980’s, he was the head criminal prosecutor in the Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office. He spent the last 18 years as a judge with the Los Angeles County Superior Court presiding over juvenile cases.

Continue reading "Former Mayor and Ex-Judge Pleads Guilty to Conflict of Interest and Misuse of Funds Charges, Receives Generous Plea Deal" »

According to the Orange County Register, five men have been accused with robbing a former mortgage lender at his Newport Coast mansion on December 8, 2009. One was arraigned on December 11, 2009. Two posted bail and were arraigned on January 26, 2010, and warrants have been issued for the other two suspects.

Each suspect has been charged with one felony count of conspiracy to commit robbery, two felony counts of kidnapping to commit robbery, five felony counts of first degree robbery in concert, and six felony counts of assault with a firearm.

According to prosecutors, the five men met up at a grocery store parking lot before the robbery. Then, three of the men went inside the house, tied up the houseguests, and pistol-whipped at least two of them; a third went to the hospital for his injuries.

Continue reading "Five Accused in Newport Beach Robbery - California Penal Code Section 211" »

It was recently reported that two San Bernardino officials have been charged with over a dozen felony counts, including bribery and misappropriation of public funds. Former Board of Supervisors Chairman Bill Postmus and former Assistant County Assessor Jim Erwin are accused of accepting $100,000 apiece from land development company Colonies Partners to settle a lawsuit the company filed against the city for $102 million. The lawsuit was filed because the city allegedly failed to make payments for flood control improvements for a development project near Upland.

Postmus is charged with five felony counts, including conspiracy to commit a crime, conflict of interest, misappropriation of public funds, and two counts of accepting a bribe. Erwin is charged with nine felony counts including bribery, misappropriation of public funds, forgery, and two counts each of corrupt influencing and extortion to obtain an official act. Both are awaiting trial on other corruption charges.

Continue reading "Two Elected San Bernardino County Officials Charged with Bribery and Why You Need an Experienced Southern California Defense Attorney to Represent You - California Penal Code Section 641" »

California Penal Code Section 273a defines child endangerment as any person causing great bodily harm or death to a child. This crime includes inflicting physical abuse upon a child, but also punishes any person who allows for a child to physically or mentally suffer. In other words, a person may be convicted of child endangerment if they cause any physical or mental harm to a child.

The definition of child endangerment as found in Penal Code Section 273a is very broad. If the defendant is accused of child endangerment the prosecution will have to prove that the defendant willfully inflicted unjustifiable physical or mental pain upon the child. The pain inflicted must be unjustifiable.

If the defendant did not cause the actual pain, he or she may still be convicted of child endangerment. This situation occurs when the defendant may have been responsible for allowing the child to be put in the position where great bodily harm or death occurred to the child. The prosecution will have to show that the defendant was responsible for the child when the pain was caused, and the defendant was criminally negligent.

There are many defenses to child endangerment. An obvious one is that the person injured must be a child. This means that the alleged victim must be under 18 years of age at the time of the alleged crime.

Another defense is that the law permits an adult to impose reasonable discipline upon their child. A parent may discipline a child in a reasonable manner, such as spanking. However, whether or not the “reasonable discipline” defense will be successful depends in great part upon the specific facts of each case. It is essential that any person being charged with child endangerment talk to a criminal defense attorney when they first discover that they are being accused of this serious crime.

Continue reading "I am Accused of Child Endangerment - What Should I Do? - California Penal Code Section 273a" »

Most felonies could be charged as lesser offenses. In other words, the lesser offenses are a part of the felony because they include the same elements. Typically, the jury must be instructed on the lesser included offense.

For example, the crime of felony assault includes the lesser offense of simple assault. Simple assault requires that the prosecution prove the following elements:

• The defendant willfully attempted to inflict injury upon another, or the defendant willfully attempted to threaten to inflict injury upon another; and


• The defendant had an apparent present ability to carry out such injury or threat; and


• This injury or threat causes the victim to have a reasonable apprehension of immediate bodily harm.

Felony assault requires that the prosecution prove the elements of simple assault plus the fact that the defendant used a deadly weapon. Thus, all the elements of simple assault are required to prove felony assault. The jury would be given instructions to convict the defendant of either felony or simple assault, rather than only be given instructions to convict the defendant of felony assault.

An instruction on a lesser-included offense is warranted if

1. "the elements of the lesser offense are a subset of the elements of the charged offense, and


2. the evidence would permit a jury rationally to find [the defendant] guilty of the lesser offense and acquit [him/her] of the greater." Schmuck v. United States, 489 U.S. 705, 716 (1989); Keeble v. United States, 412 U.S. 205, 208 (1973)).

Continue reading "Lesser Included Offenses: How An Experienced Criminal Defense Attorney Could Save you From a Felony Conviction" »

James Tyrell Harris, a South Los Angeles anti-gang activist, was arrested for allegedly misappropriating $85,000 in city funds. While serving as chairman and treasurer of the Empowerment Congress Southwest Area Neighborhood Development Council, Harris is said to have made unauthorized withdrawals and purchases for travel expenses and hiring his daughter for administrative work.

Harris already has two prior felony convictions for robbery in Los Angeles during the 1980s. Although Harris could face up to 25 years to life in prison because of the two previous strikes, Los Angeles prosecutors believe this is unlikely because the nature of the crime was not violent. Harris is not the first neighborhood council member to be accused of misappropriating funds in Los Angeles; four others within the last two years have also been charged. These recent trends have alerted officials of the need for more supervision of Los Angeles neighborhood councils given city funds.

Continue reading "Los Angeles Neighborhood Councilman Facing Felony Charges for Misusing City Funds" »

In a follow-up to a blog previously posted on this site, the California Supreme Court has decided to review to Riverside County criminal cases that had been dismissed for lack of a judge to hear them. The case that was previously posted on and that is currently under review by the California Supreme Court is People v. Wagner. This is the case where the defendant allegedly shot the victim in both knees after the defendant accompanied a female friend to help her retrieve her dog from her ex-boyfriend, the victim. The defendant was charged with very serious crimes and was facing many years in state prison. However, when his trial date got to the “last day” where a continuance would violate his constitutional speedy trial rights and the presiding judge found that there were no court rooms to hear the case, all charges were dismissed.

The Riverside District Attorney’s office decided to appeal the judge’s decision to the court of appeal and argued that the judge abused his discretion and that the criminal case should have been heard before other civil cases and that the court erred by failing to conclude that court congestion and mismanagement constituted good cause to continue the case. The Court of Appeal rejected the DA’s arguments and found that the judge did not abuse his discretion. The DA’s office appealed that decision to the California Supreme Court who decided to hear the case.

Continue reading "California Supreme Court to Hear Riverside Dismissal Cases" »

In some situations, being convicted of assault with a deadly weapon may result in serious penalties. Most people are generally aware of the potential consequences associated with a conviction for assault with a deadly weapon. A person convicted of assault with a deadly weapon may be unfortunate enough to get a lifetime suspension of driving privileges by the Department of Motor Vehicles.

Under California law, the Department of Motor Vehicles must suspend for life the driving privilege of a person convicted of assault with a deadly weapon when a vehicle is used as the deadly weapon or instrument in that offense. The new law holds that a felony conviction will result in a lifetime revocation of the driving privileges of the person convicted.

Continue reading "A Person Who is Charged with Assault with a Deadly Weapon May Be Surprised When their Driving Privilege is Suspended for Life" »

In California, there are 217 “problem-solving” courts. Many are Proposition 36 courts that treat non-violent but severely addicted drug offenders. Other courts are drug treatment courts for juvenile, parents in dependency court, and regular drug treatment court.

The idea behind these specialty courts was to “use the trauma of the moment to move individuals caught up into the system into treatment in hopes of breaking the addiction and transitioning them toward a less dangerous existence” reports California’s Daily Journal. However, such courts are not necessarily all they’re cracked out to be.

Reports indicate that money poured into these specialty courts could be used to prevent drug use and treat substance abusers before a crime is committed. Moreover, Prosecutors often offer “deals” to get drug abusers into these programs by offering the program in exchange for a guilty plea to a felony charge. However, upon completion of the program the felony often remains on the defendant’s record.

Continue reading "Are Treatment or Specialty Courts the Answer?" »

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Insight from a Criminal Defense Lawyer

An officer can generally arrest without a warrant for a felony in California not committed in the officer's presence. However, there must also be probable cause to believe that the felony was committed and that the suspect committed it, and the arrest must be in a public place. Maryland v. Pringle, 540 U.S. 366 (2003).

A ‘warrantless” arrest of an individual in a public place for a felony is inconsistent with the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution if the arrest is not supported by probable cause.

Continue reading "A Felony Arrest Will Be Deemed Unconstitutional in Violation of the Fourth Amendment if the Arrest is Not Supported by Probable Cause" »

When a person is charged with a crime, the first formal legal process is the arraignment. The arraignment is a hearing before a judge where several important things occur. If a person is in custody, the arraignment must occur within two to three days. Otherwise, arraignment is usually set for a date several weeks in the future.

There are several purposes of an arraignment. First, the defendant is formally read the charges he or she is facing. Next, the defendant is informed of his or her rights. For misdemeanor and felony crimes in California, these include a right to a jury trial, a right to present evidence, a right to confront adverse witnesses, and, if any jail time is a possibility, a right to an attorney. To be appointed a Public Defender, a defendant must meet certain income criteria. Depending on your income level and assets, the court may or may not decide that you qualify for the services of the Public Defender. If the court determines you do not qualify, generally you will be allowed to continue the arraignment in order to obtain a private attorney.

In a misdemeanor case, even if you do qualify for a Public Defender, it is often wise to obtain the services of a private attorney, because they may appear at the arraignment (and several other proceedings) without your presence. A great benefit of retaining private counsel is the simple fact that you do not have to miss work and spend all morning in a courtroom waiting to be called. This is true in some proceedings in felony cases as well, although courts vary in their requirements for the presence of the defendant.

Continue reading "Stages of the Criminal Process: Arraignment" »

Felony Conviction Reversed when Prosecutors Fail to Turn Over Evidence to Defense: Why You Need an Experienced Criminal Appeals Lawyer to Win Your Case

The Federal Court of Appeals has reversed the conviction of a defendant who had been found guilty of being a felon in possession of a firearm due to prosecutorial misconduct. The defendant had been sentenced to prison and now will be given a new trial where he can attempt to prove his innocence. This happened because the defendant was wise enough to appeal his conviction.

The key witness for the prosecution was a person who had a serious criminal background. The defense attorney representing the accused made a motion to receive all information pertaining to the prior criminal record of the witnesses for the prosecution. Many of the prior arrests and convictions were not turned over the defense prior to trial. The defendant was found guilty.

After trial it was determined that in fact the star witness for the prosecution had a serious criminal record. The defendant made a motion for new trial. The prosecutor claimed that he could not recall what information he had. However, it was clear that law enforcement knew all about the witness’s prior criminal record.

The trial judge denied the motion for new trial. However, the accused was wise enough to appeal that denial.

The federal court of appeals held that the conviction must be reversed. The court stated that the defendant is entitled to any relevant evidence that might be favorable to the accused whether it be in the possession of the prosecutor or any investigating police officers that are working on the case. The prosecutor could not claim “ignorance” and when a discovery motion is made, he must make certain he speaks to the police officers working on the case to determine what information exists that law enforcement may have that might be helpful to the accused.

Continue reading "Appealing a Felony Conviction in California" »

An Experienced Criminal Defense Attorney May Be Able to Obtain a Reduction of Your Felony Conviction to a Misdemeanor

A court may hear a petition to reduce certain felony offenses in California to a misdemeanor at any time following the suspension of judgment and granting of probation. In J.M. Meyer v. Superior Court (1966) 247 Cal. App.2d 133, 140, the court noted: “the word ‘thereafter’ in Penal Code Section 17 is not followed by a time limit, nor is it by express terms restricted to the probationary period.

Moreover, in conferring upon the court the power to declare an offense to be a misdemeanor after it has suspended imposition of judgment or sentence, the Legislature evidently intended to enable the court to reward a convicted defendant who demonstrates by his conduct that he is rehabilitated.

A court may also reduce a felony to a misdemeanor at any time following dismissal and expungement of the underlying felony. Meyer v. Superior Court (1966) 247 CA2d 133, 55 CR 350.

It is a wise decision to retain the services of an experienced criminal defense law firm if you are seeking a reduction of a felony criminal conviction offense to a misdemeanor under Penal Code 17(b). Wallin & Klarich criminal defense attorneys in California have over 30 years experience helping their clients. You can speak to one of our attorneys by calling now at 1-888-280-6839, or visit us on the web at www.wklaw.com for more information about setting up an appointment.

Budget Cuts to Lower Prosecution Rates across California: What an Experienced Criminal Defense Attorney Can Tell You

It the midst of America’s economic downturn, even state departments and government funded agencies are feeling the heat. District attorneys all over California have been buzzing about the upcoming budget cuts in their departments explaining that basically, less money means fewer prosecutions.

Contra Costa District Attorney Robert Kochly has already begun acting on the $1.9 million budget cut to his department. Kochly recently wrote a letter to local police agencies asking them not to waste their time with “quality-of-life crimes and some drug felonies” because due to the budget cuts he simply can’t afford to prosecute them. Even the prosecutors in Kochly’s departments have said that this cut in prosecutions may bring an increase in vandalism, petty theft and other crimes but it seems that the hands of district attorneys all over California are tied.

These budget cuts will undoubtedly create conflicts for DAs all over the state, as criminal defense attorneys battle to defend their clients and the DAs may not even be able to prosecute the defendants depending on the nature of the crime.

Although some in the legal community have said that they don’t think the DAs will actually lower their prosecution rates or lay off many people in the departments, many are recognizing the severity of the situation. Loyola Law School Professor Laurie Stevenson said, “I don’t think we’re leaving prosecutors with much choice. The volume of cases is just too high … I don’t think they’re bluffing.”

With such a grave situation, now more than ever it’s essential to have the right criminal defense attorney fighting for you. Serious felonies will now get more attention than ever with all of the departments’ money focused in on them and lower level felonies and misdemeanors may have an increased chance of success if handled by the correct experienced attorney.

Wallin & Klarich has over 30 years of experience in criminal defense and is here to help you in your criminal matter. Our aggressive and skilled California criminal defense attorneys are available 24 hours a day 7 days a week to talk to you about your case. Call us today at 1-888-280-6839. Also, visit us online at www.wklaw.com to learn more about your case and what can be done.

Orange County Couple is Arrested in State’s Biggest Fraud Case Ever, and Need an Experienced Criminal Defense Attorney

A Laguna Hills couple has been arrested on charges of alleged fraud in California of nearly $30 million in insurance premiums. 50-year-old Michael Vincent Petronella and his 44-year-old wife Devon Lynn Kile are facing 106 felony counts including conspiracy, insurance fraud, tax charges and theft and are facing up to 102 years in prison.

The couple was arrested after a three year investigation concluded last week as authorities confiscated $500,000 worth of jewelry, $51,000 in cash and “an application to the ‘Real Housewives of Orange County’ reality show.” The couple owns a roofing company, among other businesses, and have allegedly been misreporting their employees’ injuries and falsifying papers for uninsured workers that were injured.

Joe Angelo has known the pair for many years and is representing Petronella, while Kile is being represented by a public defender due to the confiscation of the couple’s assets. Angelo has argued that the district attorney’s office has been using a “worst-case scenario” model for the case when calculating the underpaid premiums and he continues to fight for the couple.

With such serious charges, an experienced California criminal defense lawyer is essential to the defendant’s chance of success in a case like this. The Petronellas are facing the possibility of spending the rest of their lives in prison. They and anyone else who is facing serious criminal charges need the best possible legal representation they can find.

Wallin & Klarich has over 30 years of experience in criminal defense and are here to give you the help you need in your criminal case. Our aggressive California felony defense attorneys are available 24 hours a day 7 days a week to advise you on your case. Call us today at 1-888-280-6839. Also, visit us online at www.wklaw.com to learn more about your case and what can be done.