Southern California Defense Blog

You might say to your self “I would never admit to a crime that I did not confess….no matter what the police did or say to me”. While that might be true for you, it is definitely not true for many people.

Experts in the field have studied “false confessions” for over 100 years. There are numerous shocking examples of people coming forth to confess to crimes they did not commit. In the famous “Lindbergh baby stealing case” over 200 people came forward to confess to the kidnapping and murder of the baby. Of course all of these we know were false confessions.

When actress Elizabeth Short was murdered in Los Angeles it was reported than fifty different men came forth to claim they were responsible for her murder. Once again all of these were false confessions.

If you were to listen to the tape recordings of many of these confessions they certainly sound “real”. However, they were all proven to be false.

In addition, there are many persons who are questioned by the police for hours who will make admissions or confessions to law enforcement for many reasons. In some cases they are offered “leniency” in exchange for telling the police what they want to hear. When a victim of a robbery identifies a suspect in a line-up that is often all the police need and they will do what ever it takes to obtain a confession from the person identified in the line up. It often does not matter if the suspect denies the allegations for hours or offers to present alibi evidence to show that he could not have committed the crime.

There is a movement taking place to permit expert witnesses to testify in any case where there is an admission or confession introduced by the prosecution at trial. Experts could render opinions as to why people confess to crimes they did not commit so jurors could make a determination if the case they were sitting on might be one of those cases. So far courts in California have not admitted such testimony.

So, the next time someone asks you whether you think anyone might admit to a crime they did not commit give some thought to the examples mentioned above.

Do you think experts should be allowed to testify about “confessions” in criminal cases? We would love your thoughts on this very interesting topic

If you or a loved one is accused of a crime, contact the Orange County criminal defense attorneys at Wallin and Klarich. Wallin and Klarich has many years of experience successfully defending clients. We will work to aggressively assist you through the process and investigating all aspects of your case and ensure that your rights are protected. The attorneys at Wallin & Klarich can be reached by phone at 1-888-280-6839 or fill out our intake form for immediate assistance. Call us today, we will get through this together.

Recently, the California Legislature made changes to California Penal Code 11169 and 11170, which requires the Department of Justice to maintain information about you on the Child Abuse Central Index (CACI) if you have been investigated or suspected of child abuse or severe neglect. Previously, the law required the Department of Justice to maintain information about you on the Child Abuse Central Index (CACI) even if you were suspected of child abuse before you reached the age of 18.

The law now allows you to be removed from the Child Abuse Central Index (CACI) 10 years after the date of the alleged abuse if:

- You were listed on the Child Abuse Central Index (CACI) before you reached the age of 18, and
- You have no subsequent listings of child abuse or severe neglect.

If your name is on the Child Abuse Central Index (CACI) it can negatively impact your life. The information about you on the Child Abuse Central Index (CACI), including your name and the name of the victim, the type of abuse involved, and the findings of the investigation can be reached by authorized persons for purposes of employment, licensing, adoption or child placement. Further, if your name is on the Child Abuse Central Index (CACI) it may completely disqualify you from certain employment opportunities.

If your name is on the Child Abuse Central Index (CACI) and you were suspected of child abuse or neglect before the age of 18, it is important you seek out the assistance of an experienced defense attorney. The attorneys at Wallin & Klarich have years of experience defending clients in child abuse cases and assisting clients to have their names removed from the Child Abuse Central Index (CACI). We have offices in Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Riverside, San Diego, Ventura and Orange County. Call us today at 1-888-280-6839 or visit us online at www.wklaw.com. We will be there when you call.

If it wasn’t bad enough that you may be headed to State Prison.

Now the Federal Court of Appeals has said that you are not entitled to the same level of medical care as an ordinary.

In a recent decision handed down by a 2 to 1 vote in the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeal it was decided that if you sue a medical physician who works in a prison they can raise the legal defense that they were not provided with the adequate help they needed by the State to properly take care of you. If they raise that defense they can win as was in the case of Peralta vs. Dillard.

Dillard was a prison dentist and Peralta was a State Prison inmate. Peralta needed dental care and so he requested to see a prison dentist in January, 2004. However, due to “staff shortages” he was not seen until October, 2004, but at that time Peralta was not examined for the complaints that he had. The next time Peralta was seen was in January, 2005 for “five minutes”. The bottom line is that nobody argues that Peralta did not receive deficient medical care. The issue was whether the prison dentist could raise as a defense that it wasn’t his fault because the State was too poor to provide adequate medical staffing for the inmates.

The trial court said he could use that defense. The jury loved such defense and quickly ruled in favor of the dentist. Two of the three federal appellate justices agreed with the trial judge.

What does this mean to those poor souls who are either in a California State Prison or are headed in that direction? It means that they can expect to receive inadequate health care in prison. With this ruling there is no incentive for any medical personnel to offer adequate medical care. In fact in the Peralta case the dentist that was sued was allowed to show deliberate, indifference to the inmates medical needs because the state didn’t provide him adequate staffing.

It is one thing to feel sorry for Mr. Peralta’s dental issue. However, when we begin to receive reports that inmates with cancer and other life threatening illnesses are dying because they are not being provided with adequate medical care maybe someone who cares about all humans (even those serving time in prison) will stand up and say this is just not humane.

Our State provides millions of dollars for animals who are injured to help care for them. One would hope that we would care about the human beings that are serving time in prison when it comes to their medical needs.

We would like your thoughts on this most recent court decision!!!

If you find yourself accused of a crime in Orange County, Riverside, San Bernardino, Ventura or Los Angeles – you can turn to the experienced Orange County criminal defense lawyers at Wallin and Klarich to help you. We have been here fighting for our clients’ legal rights for over 30 years. Call today 888-280-6839.

Under California Penal Code section 851.5, you must be allowed to make three completed phone calls within three hours after you have been arrested. Further, if you are a custodial parent you are entitled to make two additional phone calls to arrange for the care of any minor children. The right to make these telephone calls to arrange for child care is allowed regardless of your immigration status.

Due to recent amendments, California law now requires that the arresting officer ask you if you are a custodial parent. If you are a custodial parent, the arresting officer must inform you that you are allowed to make two additional phone calls to arrange for child care during your absence. The arresting officer must inform you of your right to make telephone calls as soon as it is practicable, but no later than three hours after your arrest. Further, your right to make two additional phone calls regarding child care for minor children must also be posted on a sign that is out in the open and visible to you after arrest.

If the phone calls are made within the local calling area they will be no expense to you, but if they are made outside the local calling area you will be liable for the expense.

If you or a loved one has been arrested it is important you contact an experienced and knowledgeable Ventura criminal defense law firm. The attorneys at Wallin & Klarich have over 30 years of experience successfully defending clients in criminal matters. We have offices in Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura and Orange County. Call us today at 1-888-280-6839 or visit us online at www.wklaw.com for more information. We will get through this together.

Rabbi Moshe Zigelman, an orthodox rabbi was called to testify before the grand jury as a witness in a federal prosecution. He refused to testify citing the Jewish principle of “mesira” which forbids Jews from testifying against other Jews in a court of law.

When the rabbi refused to testify a federal judge placed him in custody for almost seven months. However, a Los Angeles judge recently reversed the order and he was released from custody.

This issue raises the very interesting issue of whether religious beliefs can ever allow a person to refuse to follow California or federal laws. Some people believe that to force a person to violate their firmly held religious beliefs is wrong. Others would argue that you first are a citizen of the state and country where you live and that you must be bound by the laws of that state or country even if those laws conflict with your religious beliefs.

No matter what you personally believe this man spent seven months of his life in jail because he refused to violate his religious beliefs. Can you imagine any situation where you would put your religious beliefs ahead of the laws of the state where you live?

Do you think the judge was correct in putting the rabbi in jail for 7 months?

In order to make sure that your rights are protected and that you are tried accordingly to what is legally justified, you must rely on Wallin & Klarich’s extended experience and superb knowledge of criminal defense law. Our attorneys will aggressively fight to protect your rights. Contact us today by calling 1-888-280-6839 or by visiting our website www.wklaw.com. We will be there when you call. We have offices in Los Angeles, Riverside, Ventura, San Bernardino and Orange County.

The United States Supreme Court has ruled in prior cases that students do not have the same rights when they are on campus than they do in other locations. This means that school administration can search student lockers without the need for probable cause or a warrant. It also means that student’s free speech rights are more limited when they are on campus. Schools can regulate what type of non-school related groups can meet on campus.


However, the latest decision by some public and private high schools has just gone too far. It has been confirmed that some public and private schools are now embedding microchip tracking devices in student identification cards when they enroll as a student. This permits the school to monitor the students location at all times.

School officials claim that these “tracking chips” help them improve school safety and allow them to monitor attendance and student whereabouts. Those that believe in the rights of young people to be free from having their every move tracked as if they were criminals are outraged by this latest development.

Luckily in 2012 the United States Supreme Court ruled that before a GPS device could be attached to a person’s vehicle by law enforcement to monitor their movements a warrant was required. However, the court did not address whether students would be afforded the same constitutional protections.

We are very interested to know how you feel about this latest move by schools to monitor student’s movements. Do you believe this is an unwarranted violation of the student’s constitutional rights? Do you feel that the students should be required to submit to these “tracking devices” as a reasonable price to pay for obtaining an education? Please tell us what you think. We are certain that this issue will end up in the courts. We will monitor all court rulings on this issue.

In order to make sure that your rights are protected, you must rely on Wallin & Klarich’s extended experience and superb knowledge of criminal defense law. Our attorneys will aggressively fight to protect your rights. Contact us today by calling 888-280-6839 or by visiting our website www.wklaw.com. We have offices in Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, Ventura and Orange Counties. We will be there when you call.

Governor Brown recently signed into California law a bill that will make it unlawful for therapists to attempt to change the sexual orientation of persons in California through the use of what is referred to as “reparative therapy”. This type of therapy attempts to “treat” homosexuals in an attempt to convince them to change their sexual orientation. The new law outlaws such therapy and subjects therapists who employ this “reparative therapy” method to discipline by state licensing boards.

This new law is to take effect on January 1, 2013. However, four counselors and two parents who say their teenage sons were helped by this form of therapy have filed a lawsuit in federal court claiming that this new law violates the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. They are asking a federal judge to grant them an order stopping the new law from going into effect.

Federal judge Kimberly Mueller is hearing legal arguments on this issue. She has to decide whether the new law is legal “state action” or whether the new law violates the right of therapists to choose what they believe is the best form of professional treatment for their patients.

This new law is a very good law to prevent this type of therapy from being allowed in California. It is accepted by all in the scientific community that sexual orientation is not a “choice” someone makes. A person who is gay cannot become straight just as a black person cannot become Hispanic. All of the therapy in the world will not change that basic fact. What this therapy does is cause serious long term psychological damage to the innocent patient who is often brought to the therapist by parents who cannot come to grips with the reality that their child is gay.

This has nothing to do with freedom of speech. It has to be with protecting innocent young men and women from ongoing abuse at the hands of therapists.

We invite your comments and we will monitor this case closely.

For over 30 years, Wallin & Klarich has been defending the rights of thousands of clients. We are an AV rated law firm by Martindale Hubbell. We have offices in Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Ventura, Riverside and Orange Counties. If you have any legal questions, one of our experienced attorneys would be glad to provide you with the information you seek. Call us at 888-280-6839. We will be there when you call.

In what is being called a major victory for the health of those who work in the Adult Entertainment industry, the voters of Los Angeles County approved Measure B which requires all Adult Entertainment actors to wear condoms in any film that they make in Los Angeles County. The new law will carry strict fines for violations.

Many in the industry are greatly concerned that this new law will negatively impact sales of their movies. They claim that when similar laws have been passed in other states that sales have plummeted by as much as 30%. The theory behind the argument is that “consumers” of adult films do not want to purchase films where condoms are being used.

On the other hand the Department of Health has stated that new guidelines will be developed quickly to make sure that the law is enforced. Whether or not inspections will become part of the enforcement remains to be seen.

Michael Weinstein, founder of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, stated that there have been many recent HIV infections along with other sexually transmitted diseases discovered to exist in members of the industry. A great concern of course is that these diseases will spread when these persons engage in sexual activity with those not involved in Adult Entertainment.

We are interested in your thoughts on this matter? Do you believe that this law makes sense? Do you feel this is a violation of the civil rights of the Adult Entertainment industry to decide the content of their videos without government involvement? We would like to hear your thoughts. Follow us on facebook: https://www.facebook.com/wallin.klarich

After months of refusing to answer the question, finally yesterday Romney stated that if he were elected he would not reverse President Obama’s executive order granting millions of young adults a chance to obtain a work permit for a two year period as a first step to legal status in the United States.

Romney was quoted as saying he would not feel right taking away something that these people had purchased. Romney claimed that within the two year window that Obama has put into play Romney would have adopted a comprehensive immigration plan that would become the law.

However, few intelligent people should believe what Romney has to say. First, he is being backed by millions of voters who do not believe that Obama’s executive order was something he could legally do. During the recent Republican debates Romney said many times that he believed the proper immigration policy would be for all of those illegally in this country to “voluntarily deport” themselves and return to their “home country” and then stand in line and wait for them to be able to legally immigrate to the United States.

With Romney’s standing in the polls among Hispanics dropping to extremely low levels it is clear Romney is once again “changing his position” on another important issue to millions of Americans.

First he was for a women’s right to choose and now he is firmly pro-life.

Then he was responsible for putting a health care program into place in Massachusetts when he was governor, which is almost identical to “Obamacare”. Now he goes around the country claiming on his first day in office he will “abolish Obamacare”.

Now he decides with five weeks to go before the election and him trailing in Florida and Nevada and other states with large Hispanic voting blocks that he should change his position on immigration in order to attempt to gain some votes.

The voters in this country are just too smart to not see through his latest political move.

President Obama has been far from perfect in his four years in office. However, he has done the courageous thing time and time again regardless of politics.

He supports gay marriage at a time when that is a highly controversial position to take.

He issued an executive order to help millions of young adults remain in this country and not be deported when millions of Americans oppose this idea.

He continues to fight for Obamacare because it is allowing lower and middle income people to have health insurance including prenatal care and cancer screenings.
He does so even thought a majority of Americans do not support his position.

The choice is so clear. Romney’s most recent move will not change voters mind. He cannot be trusted.

The answer to that question depends upon why the warrant was issued for your arrest in the “other state”. If the other state issued a warrant for your arrest for a felony matter then it is highly likely that state will issue an “extradition warrant” for your arrest. They will send the warrant to all the other 49 states in the United States. If you are stopped by a police officer in California and the officer locates this “extradition warrant” you will be taken into custody and likely held without bail.

This would then commence an “extradition” matter. You should retain an experienced extradition criminal lawyer immediately. That lawyer can possibly work with a lawyer in the “other state” in an attempt to have the warrant lifted. However, if that doesn’t happen there are other possible defenses to an extradition matter.

If you are facing an extradition matter you are legally entitled to an “identification hearing”. At that hearing the court has to determine certain legal issues before the judge can sign an extradition warrant. However, if the judge does sign the extradition warrant then the “other state” is notified and they have thirty days in which to pick you up and return you to that state to face the criminal charges. If the state fails to pick you up then California is required to release you from custody.

However, this does not end the process. This is because you could be stopped by another police officer a few days or weeks later and the process would begin all over again.

If you know you have a felony warrant in another state you should contact our law firm so we can help you work with a lawyer in the other state to resolve the matter. If you are arrested on an extradition warrant you are more than likely going to be returned to that state in custody. This is definitely not a pleasant experience and you can be in custody for a long time.

For over 30 years Wallin & Klarich has been defending the rights of thousands of satisfied clients. If you or a loved one is facing extradition, you must call our law offices at 888-280-6839. We have offices in San Bernardino, Ventura, Los Angeles, Riverside and Orange County. We will be there when you call.

On Saturday, September 29, 2012 California Governor Jerry Brown decided to stand up for thousands of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender children by signing a historical bill that will protect minors from undergoing any sort of reparative therapy.

Reparative therapy has been implemented by religious groups and mental health facilities for decades in misguided attempts to change the sexual preference of minors who have been brave enough to declare their sexual preference at a young age. Some of the techniques attempted during reparative therapy to alter sexual preference are painful as well as barbaric in nature. Some include the use of electric shock and attempted exorcisms.

In addition, this type of “therapy” has been found to be ineffective and can be lead to serious psychological effects on the minors who have been compelled to undergo such treatment. In some cases, those minors who have endured reparative therapy have suffered severe depression that has led to numerous suicide attempts.

Through this bill, Governor Brown has banned any “non-scientific” practice that may disturb the health and psychological well-being of thousands of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender minors. Thus, we must acknowledge his courage to take a stand and to be the first Governor in the United States to say “no more” to these brutal, inhumane practices that affect the lives of many innocent young individuals world-wide.

Thank you Governor Brown for leading by example and showing our youth that you care for their well-being.

Wallin & Klarich has been a leading supporter of the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community for over 30 years. We have helped thousands of such individuals when they find themselves involved in legal matters. If you or a loved one is going through any legal matter, calls us for a free consultation, 888-280-6839. We will be there when you call.

As one of the most well-known areas in the Los Angeles area, the city of Hollywood is home to over approximately 210,777 individuals. Situated west-northwest of Downtown LA, Hollywood is famous for its movie studios and being the historical hub of movie stars. Some of the most sought-after landmarks in Hollywood include the Shrine Auditorium, the Griffith Park Observatory, the Hollywood Bowl, Capitol Records, and the Grauman’s Chinese Theatre. With a population density of about 8,443 people per square mile, Hollywood experiences its share of arrests for assault and battery criminal offenses due to a wide variety of altercations and misunderstandings.

Being arrested for assault or battery in Hollywood can be an intimidating process, especially for individuals who do not even understand why they were arrested in the first place. Based on California Penal Code Section 240, a person can be arrested for assault if it is believed that they intended to commit physical violence, battery or willful use of force upon another individual. It is during such challenging situations that an arrested person may want to seek legal counsel and representation from an aggressive Hollywood assault defense lawyer. Under California Penal Code Section 242, a person may be charged with battery if they are suspected of carrying out any physical contact that was outside of someone else’s consent.

Due to the often highly complex legal matters that surround charges for assault and battery in Southern California, arrested individuals should get in touch with a criminal defense law firm with the experience necessary to obtain a successful outcome in any criminal case. The skilled attorneys at Wallin & Klarich have been assisting those charged with a wide range of crimes for more than 30 years. We fully understand the potential defenses to an assault or battery charge, including defense of another, self-defense, inability to carry out assault or battery, intoxication, lack of requisite intent to commit battery, or consent on the alleged victim’s part. Find out more about how the lawyers at Wallin & Klarich can help you with your case. Call 888-280-6839 or visit www.wklaw.com today.

It was recently reported that in Columbus, Ohio, more than $100,000 went missing after a bag of cash fell from an armored car into an intersection. Passing motorists abruptly stopped to get grab handfuls of bills. About $100,000 was picked up by police officers and $12,000 more was returned by good Samaritans after the bag hit the pavement, was run over and split open Wednesday morning. About 15 to 20 people scrambled to grab cash. Local police reported that there were $20 bills everywhere and money was money floating all over the place.

The owner of the armored car company transporting the money complained that "it's not free money" and "it's different than walking down the street and finding a $5 bill laying there. This is clearly marked, identifiable money that belongs to somebody else laying in the middle of a busy intersection with bank bags lying all over the place.” Police warned drivers that people who fail to return cash could face charges such as grand theft.

Similarly, in California, individuals who take property that is not theirs will face theft charges. Grand theft is defined in California as the taking of money, labor, or real or personal property whose value exceeds $400. If this had occurred in California, any of the drivers who stopped to take the money would be facing grand theft charges if the amount of money taken was more than $400. Punishment for grand theft includes imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year or in the state prison.

Continue reading "$100,000 Missing After Armored Car Spills Bag of Money and How a Criminal Defense Attorney Can Help You - California Penal Code section 487" »

Carlie Shultz, an 18 year old Spring Valley woman, was recently arrested and charged with reckless evading a peace officer. San Diego 10 News reported that a California Highway Patrol officer initially pulled Shultz over for a traffic violation when he observed her speeding on Highway 54. The patrol officer reported that she had been traveling over 120 miles per hour. Shultz, however, did not comply with the patrol officer’s request and led the officer on a high speed chase which ended on Interstate 5 when Shultz lost control of the vehicle and crashed. She walked away from the crash uninjured.

Under California Vehicle Code 2800.2(a), reckless attempts to flee from or evade a peace officer is a crime that is punishable by fines of up to $10,000 and/or imprisonment in state or county jail for up to one year. A person is deemed to have been reckless if they drove the vehicle in a willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property. The punishment for this crime is likely to be more severe in situations where there is property damage, injury to another person, or extremely high speeds.

Continue reading "Have You Been Accused of Reckless Evading? - California Vehicle Code 2800.2(a)" »

Valencia is a planned community that combines with three other communities to form Santa Clarita. Often used as prime filming spots for several different TV series, Valencia is also known for its network of walkways that link the whole area without crossing streets at grade. Valencia has an estimated population of 32,643 and welcomes several visitors throughout the year. In being a diverse and lively community, similar to other busy cities, arrests for assault and battery have been known to take place in Valencia.

Being arrested for assault or battery in Valencia is often an overwhelming experience. Most individuals arrested for assault do not understand why they have even been taken into custody. This is mainly due to the fact that several people are unaware that an arrest for assault can be made if a person is thought to have intended to commit physical violence, battery, or willful use of force on another individual. Conversely, under California Penal Code Section 242, physical contact must take place outside of another person’s consent in order for an arrest for battery to occur. An experienced Valencia assault defense attorney will be able to help an arrested individual understand his or her legal rights and build a strong defense on their behalf.

At Wallin & Klarich, our aggressive and knowledgeable Valencia criminal defense attorneys have been defending the rights of those accused of a wide range of criminal offenses, including those that relate to assault and battery, for over 30 years. We are very familiar with the many potential defenses to an assault or battery offense. Some of these defenses may include intoxication, self-defense, consent on the part of the alleged victim, defense of another, and lack of requisite intent to commit battery. The time to act is now. Call Wallin & Klarich at 888-280-6839 or visit www.wklaw.com for more information about how we can help you with your case.

How an Experienced Southern California Defense Attorney Can Help You Retain Your Rights

The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department recently disclosed new guidelines for deputies, determining that it is often better to contain armed suspects and wait for backup rather than to chase and arrest them. The new guidelines were introduced after Sheriff Lee Baca decided to reexamine the department’s protocol for deputy-involved shootings after 16 fatal shootings by deputies were reported in 2009 compared to 9 reported in 2008.

The new guidelines are detailed in a 30-page booklet complied by a panel of senior officers convened by Baca in September 2009. The purpose was to study procedures involving foot pursuits. These guidelines are believed to be the first such policies in the country. The purpose of the recommendations is to minimize the potential for “officer-created jeopardy,” where officers unnecessarily place themselves in harm’s way.

Continue reading "Los Angeles Police Change Policy in Containing Armed Suspects" »

The California State Bar Disciplinary Panel recently upheld a judge’s recommendation to suspend former Santa Clara County prosecutor Benjamin Field from the State Bar for four years. Field appealed to the State Bar Review Department’s finding that he had withheld exculpatory evidence and committed other misconduct in four cases he had prosecuted.

He was accused of violating court orders and directives, performing incompetently, failing to obey the law, withholding evidence, misleading a judge, and committing “multiple acts involving moral turpitude, dishonesty, or corruption.”

Field appealed the decision in hopes of receiving a lenient decision. Instead, he received a suspension from the bar for four years and five years of probation. The decision was made to “protect the public and the courts” and “preserve public confidence in the legal profession and to maintain high professional standards for attorneys.”

The first accusation of misconduct against Field was made in 1995. In a sexual assault case involving a minor, Field obtained a dental examination of the defendant, disobeying a court order that resulted in the judge suppressing the evidence taken from it. On two occasions in 2003, Field intentionally withheld a witness statement that was favorable to the defense in a habeas corpus proceeding involving a sexual assault case, and he intentionally withheld a defendant’s statement favorable to co-defendants in a murder case. In both cases that year, Field was found to have committed a discovery violation. In the latter murder case, one of the charges against the defendants was dismissed due to Field’s misconduct. And in 2005, Field made an improper closing argument in a sexually violent predator case that was deemed “deceptive and reprehensible” by the court presiding over the case. As a result, the appellate court reversed the judgment committing the defendant as a sexually violent predator.

Continue reading "District Attorney Violates the Law by Violating the Legal Rights of Defendants - How an Experienced Southern California Defense Attorney Can Help Ensure Your Rights" »

It was recently reported that nine youths have been charged in relation to the suicide of a 15-year-old girl in Massachusetts. Phoebe Prince, who had recently moved to South Hadley, Massachusetts from Ireland, hung herself after being raped and bullied by classmates since the start of the school year in September 2009. Prince committed suicide on January 14th. Initially thought to be a case of cyber bullying, it is believed Prince was bullied on and off the campus of her high school in the presence of teachers and fellow students.

Six teenagers, four girls and two boys, face charges of statutory rape, assault, violation of civil rights resulting in injury, criminal harassment, disturbance of a school assembly, and stalking. Three younger girls are facing delinquency charges. Three of the nine teenagers, who are 17-years-old or older, will be tried as adults.

Complicating matters, the parents of two of the teenagers have spoken to the media, insisting on the innocence of their children, stating the school bullying was nothing more than the exchanging of “a couple words.” It is recommended that the accused retain an attorney immediately after charges are filed and have any statements made through the attorney.

All of the charges the teenagers are facing are very serious. Statutory rape, assault, harassment, creating a disturbance, and stalking carry serious consequences in California. Out of all the charges, California statutory rape is the most serious. California "statutory rape," defined under Penal Code Section 261.5, takes place when any person engages in sexual intercourse with a person under the age of 18 (commonly referred to as unlawful sex with a minor). Statutory rape can be charged as a misdemeanor or a felony. As a misdemeanor, statutory rape can result in up to a year in jail with fines and probation. As a felony, it can result in four years in state prison with fines and probation.

Continue reading "Nine Charged after Bullying of Teenage Student Phoebe Prince Ends in Suicide" »

As a major part of the bustling area of San Bernardino County, the city of Ontario is home to approximately 171,691 individuals, as of 2000 estimates. As the main center for freight and passengers, several major freeways pass through Ontario which also has a small international airport. As a very cultural and prosperous city, Ontario also has its own ECHL hockey team, the Ontario Reign. In being such a densely populated area that receives several visitors throughout the year, arrests are made from time to time for assault or battery in which those who are accused may want to seek legal counsel and representation from an experienced Ontario criminal defense lawyer.

Contrary to what many Californians believe, a person can be arrested for an assault offense under California Penal Code Section 240 if he or she is suspected of having intended to commit battery, physical violence, or willful use of force on another individual. No actual physical contact needs to take place in order for a person to be arrested for assault in Ontario. On the other hand, California Penal Code Section 242 states that battery may be interpreted as any physical contact that takes place outside of another individual’s consent. It is in such instances that a skilled Ontario assault and battery defense attorney can be contacted to help defend the rights of an arrested individual.

The Southern California criminal defense law firm of Wallin & Klarich has been assisting those accused of many different kinds of criminal offenses for more than 30 years. We will thoroughly investigate your case to determine whether valid and effective defenses to your assault or battery charges are applicable. Some of these defenses could relate to defense of another, self-defense, inability to actually carry out assault or battery, lack of requisite intent to commit battery, consent on the part of the victim, and intoxication. Call Wallin & Klarich’s aggressive defense lawyers today at 888-280-6839 or visit www.wklaw.com for more information.

It was recently reported that a Pasadena couple was charged with torture and murder in the child death of their 2-year-old son, who was found dead in the family home. Maria Pelaez, 30, and Gabriel Diaz, 33, reportedly admitted to police that they taped the limbs of 2-year-old Rene Torres to restrain and punish him. Torres died from asphyxiation. It is alleged the toddler’s death was due to his mouth being taped shut.

Pelaez is arguing that Diaz was responsible for her son’s death, as she was not aware of what Diaz did to her son the night he died. Pelaez maintains she was nothing but a loving, doting mother and it would be absolutely, completely out of character to harm her child.

Murder in California is defined in California Penal Code Section 187. Murder is committed when someone commits an act that caused the death of another person with malice aforethought. Malice aforethought is a state of mind. It requires knowledge that through an action or omission, the result will be someone’s death. Malice can be expressed or implied. It is expressed when someone shows a deliberate intention to kill someone. It can be implied when there is no considerable provocation or when the circumstances show an abandoned or malignant heart. A conviction for murder can result in life in prison.

Continue reading "Pasadena Couple Suspected in Murder and Torture in Infant Death Of 2-Year-Old Son - California Penal Code Section 187 and Section 206" »