Southern California Defense Blog

The Southern California city of Chula Vista is a hub for businesses and tourists alike, and lies along the coast, stretching an estimated 51.2 square miles. Its evaluated population of 217,478 does not include the large number of travelers and tradesmen that enter the city annually in search of vacation and commerce. Like other major cities that cater to a variety of consumers and residents, situations of arrest for assault and battery can sometimes occur.

Assault and battery criminal charges can stagger the life of an individual in many ways. If convicted of assault or battery, an individual may face unfortunate consequences like fines and imprisonment. According to California Penal Code Section 242, a person can be taken into police custody for battery if he or she makes non-consensual physical contact with another person. Assault, as explained by Penal Code Section 240, is imputable when a person means to commit battery, has violent intent or wants to physically harm another. If you have been accused of such crimes, you can find out your legal rights by seeking the aid of an experienced Chula Vista battery defense attorney.

The Southern California assault and battery defense attorneys at Wallin and Klarich have three decades of experience helping Chula Vista residents who face criminal charges. Our aggressive legal defense team will protect your rights with strong defenses against assault and battery claims, such as lack of requisite intent to commit battery, intoxication, inability to follow through with assault and battery, providing defense for another person, or even self-defense. The law firm of Wallin and Klarich is prepared to answer your criminal defense questions and is immediately available to assist you with your case. Contact us today at 888-280-6839 or visit our website at www.wklaw.com for additional information.

California Health and Safety Code Section 11377 makes methamphetamine (“meth”) possession illegal. Meth Possession is a serious crime with serious penalties. If you are charged with meth possession, it is important that you speak to an experienced criminal defense attorney to get you the best possible result in your case.

Meth possession means that you had physical custody of the meth. You must also know the nature of meth as a controlled substance to be convicted. The amount of meth also has to be usable. If this can be proven, you may face a conviction for meth possession.

Having an experienced attorney can help you bring up defenses to your charge. There are many defenses to meth possession. The obvious one is that the defendant did not have physical control over the substance. Furthermore, the defendant cannot be convicted of possession of methamphetamine if he/she was not aware or had knowledge that the methamphetamine was in their presence or that it was a controlled substance.

There is also the momentary meth possession defense. Momentary possession requires that the defendant only possessed the substance for a momentary or transitory period; the possession of methamphetamine was for purposes of abandoning it, disposing of it or to destroy it.

Continue reading "I am Accused of Meth Possession - What Should I Do? - California Health and Safety Code Section 11377" »

Spanning about 98.4 square miles, Riverside, California, is the 61st largest city in America, the number 12 largest city in all of California, and the number one biggest city in the metro area of Riverside-San Bernardino. Its approximate 311,575 residents are about 60 miles east of Los Angeles, and Riverside has its own notable sites including parks (California Citrus State Historic Park), museums (Riverside Metropolitan Museum), and schools (University of California, Riverside). The Mission Inn Hotel is also in Riverside; a national treasure as the nation’s hugest Mission Revival Style structure. Similar to other thriving cities, Riverside experiences incidents of arrests for assault and battery from time to time.

Being accused of an assault or battery crime in Riverside can be an intimidating experience that often leaves an individual feeling confused and overwhelmed regarding his or her legal rights and what defenses may be available. Based on California Penal Code Section 240, a person only has to be accused of intending to commit battery, physical violence, or willful use or force on another person to be arrested for assault. Under California Penal Code Section 242, an individual may be arrested for battery if physical contact or violence occurs beyond another person’s consent. In such instances, an accused individual may find it beneficial to contact an aggressive Riverside assault defense lawyer who will help them understand their rights and provide a strong defense for their case.

At Wallin & Klarich, our experienced and skilled Riverside assault and battery defense attorneys have been assisting those charged with a broad range of crimes for more than 30 years. Our Southern California legal team is extremely familiar with potential defenses to an assault and battery charge, some of which may include self-defense, defense of another, inability to actually carry out assault or battery, lack of requisite intent to commit battery, intoxication, and even consent on the part of the alleged victim. To learn more about how the criminal defense law firm of Wallin & Klarich can help you with your case, please visit our website at www.wklaw.com or call 888-280-6839 today.

California Health & Safety Code Section 11350 is a law that makes it illegal to possess various types of drugs as defined within the health and safety code.

In order to be convicted of possession of a controlled substance, the prosecution must prove that you unlawfully possessed a controlled substance, that you knew of its presence, that you knew of the substance’s nature or character as a controlled substance, what the controlled substance was, and that the quantity possessed was a usable amount. Possession means that a person has physical custody and control over the substance.

One of the many defenses to possession of a controlled substance is momentary/transitory possession. In order to successfully assert the defense of momentary/transitory possession, it must be shown that the defendant possessed the controlled substance only for a momentary or transitory period, that the defendant possessed the controlled substance in order to abandon, dispose of, or destroy it, and that the defendant did not intend to prevent law enforcement officials from obtaining the controlled substance. Of course, because every case is unique it is vital that you speak with an experienced criminal defense attorney about the particular facts of your case and any defense that may be available to you.

Continue reading "I am Accused of Possession of a Controlled Substance - What Should I Do? - California Health & Safety Code Section 11350" »

It was recently reported that Donald Haidl, the alleged “money man” for disgraced Orange County Sheriff Mike Carona, will not serve jail time because Haidl provided “extraordinary” cooperation with prosecutors in convicting Carona for corruption.

Haidl will instead pay a $40,000 fine and perform community service on a guilty plea for filing a false tax return. The crime carries a statutory minimum of three years in prison and a $100,000 fine.

During Carona’s corruption trial, Haidl testified about funneling illegal contributions to Carona’s election campaign and paying Carona and his top aid $1,000 a month to keep them from accepting bribes from any other source. Haidl also secretly recorded conversations with Carona on three occasions. One recorded conversation had Carona and Haidl discussing how they should testify before a grand jury, leading the jury to convict Carona of witness tampering. Carona was sentenced to 5 1/2 years in jail on the witness tampering charge.

Continue reading ""Money Man" Spared Jail Time and Felony Conviction in Exchange for Turning Informant and Providing Witness Testimony" »

Under California Vehicle Code Section 21809, the law now gives greater protection to emergency vehicles that are parked on the shoulder of a freeway. This means that if you are driving in either the very far right or very far left lanes, the law requires you to change lanes if you see that you are coming up behind an emergency vehicle that is parked on the freeway shoulder and has its lights flashing. If you determine that it would be unsafe for you to change lanes, then the law requires you to slow down to a reasonable speed.

If you have been ticketed for this infraction in California, make sure you hire a traffic ticket lawyer to help you get the case dismissed. If you are convicted of this traffic infraction, you are facing a $50 fine and one point on your driving record. However, penalty assessments will be added to the $50 so that the total amount you will have to pay will be closer to $200. By hiring a traffic ticket lawyer, you may be able to avoid paying the fines and you may also be able to avoid the points on your driving record.

Continue reading "Don't Get Ticketed for Passing a Parked Emergency Vehicle - California Vehicle Code Section 21809" »

Self-help guru, James Arthur Ray, has been charged with three counts of manslaughter after dozens of his followers collapsed in a sweat lodge at his retreat center in Arizona. Allegedly, over twenty people were hospitalized, and three of them never regained consciousness and died at a hospital. If he is convicted, Mr. Ray could be sentenced to more than 35 years in prison.

Since prosecutors charged Mr. Ray with manslaughter, Arizona law requires that the prosecution prove that James Ray acted with criminal intent. The prosecutors could prove criminal intent by showing that Mr. Ray acted recklessly and that his actions caused the deaths of his alleged victims. At trial, the prosecution might be able to show this by providing evidence that Mr. Ray was aware that others were ill at previous retreats. The prosecution could also show evidence that Mr. Ray lied about the incidents and ignored signs of medical distress among his followers.

Continue reading "An Arizona Self-Help Guru Has Been Charged With Manslaughter" »

NPR reported that a former emergency room doctor was convicted of six felony counts in an incident involving a car which was allegedly used as a weapon.

The news story said that the incident started when the doctor, while driving his car, got a little too close for comfort with a couple of cyclists who were apparently hogging the road. The doctor and the cyclists exchanged words, and the doctor went around the cyclists and suddenly slammed on his brakes. One of the cyclists couldn’t stop and slammed into the back of the car. The cyclist was severely injured and the doctor was arrested.

The doctor now faces up to 10 years in prison and also faces losing his driver’s license for the rest of his life because the weapon purportedly used was a car.

Have you or a loved one been accused of assault with a deadly weapon involving a motor vehicle? Assault with a deadly weapon in California is considered a serious or violent felony and could mean possible time in prison as well as a lifetime suspension of your driver’s license. It is important to contact an experienced attorney to represent your interests and your rights in court.

Continue reading "Doctor Convicted of Assault with a Deadly Weapon - California Penal Code Section 245" »

The number ten most populated city in California, Anaheim, stretches 50.5 miles to cover most of Orange County. Its estimated 348,467 residents share their city with a steady file of professionals and vacationers who come to conference, share business and see Anaheim’s well-known theme parks Disney California Adventure and Disneyland. The Anaheim Convention Center is another Anaheim staple, hosting leisure and sports events that draw families and friends seeking entertainment. As a favored tourist spot and friendly place to live, sometimes Anaheim residents do not want to admit instances of conflict and heated debate that may result in assault and battery charges.

Assault and battery charges in Anaheim may arise from an initially simple interaction. For instance, two or more parties can begin an argument about any subject, whether the situation is as small as an argument at a convenience store or a shouting match built from a larger scale fender bender. Sometimes the matter at hand can trigger a person’s negative emotions to provoke intense physical response or verbal backlash. According to Section 242 of the California Penal code, battery is defined as non-consensual physical contact, and is a criminal offense. However, section 240 of the Code says that a person does not have to follow through with their intent to commit battery in order to be accused of assault. If you have been charged with assault or arrested for battery, you may be left wondering how the law defines your legal rights and how you can better understand any unfortunate accusations set against you.

The Anaheim battery defense attorneys at Wallin and Klarich have over 30 years of experience tackling assault and battery cases, and also have defended many who face various other criminal offenses. The experienced group of Southern California lawyers is committed to helping you create a solid defense for your case so that your trial can have a positive conclusion. Defenses such as looking out for another person’s well-being, intoxication, physical inability to carry out attack, or even self-defense can be used to successfully explain your case. To reach one of the aggressive and confident lawyers at Wallin & Klarich who can aid you through your trial and translate your legal rights, visit www.wklaw.com, or call 888-280-6839 today.

Recently, a federal case against an Orange County politician was dealt a blow when a portion of the prosecutors’ audio evidence was found to be missing.

The case arose out of the 2006 general election for California’s 47th House of Representatives district to represent Santa Ana between incumbent Loretta Sanchez and challenger Tan Duc Nguyen. During the campaign, a letter apparently from Nguyen went out to 14,000 residents in the district with Latino names. The letter, written in Spanish, warned the residents that if they were immigrants, undocumented or otherwise, voting in the election would result in their imprisonment and deportation.

The U.S. Department of Justice formally charged Nguyen with obstruction of justice for not being truthful in his interview with investigators about the matter. However, the U.S. District Judge presiding over the case questioned why Nguyen wasn’t charged with actually sending out the letter himself.

Most damning, there was a 40 minute gap in the two-hour audio interview with Nguyen about the letter. After the first 15 minutes, the tape recorder apparently stopped working, but no one noticed until 40 minutes later, when a new one was brought in. The judge pointed out that during his days as a deputy district attorney, it was standard procedure to have two recorders tape interviews simultaneously.

Continue reading "How an Experienced Southern California Criminal Defense Attorney Can Find Errors and Flaws in Prosecutors Case" »

Orange County Collaborative Courts are specialized courts that cater to specific underlying issues that may be present in individuals who come before the court. These courts offer judicial monitoring and a team approach to decision making, including the participation of different agencies. One of these Collaborative Court programs is known as Veteran’s Court.

The mission of the Veteran’s Court is to provide a treatment program for combat veterans in the criminal justice system. To be eligible, the defendant must be a combat veteran. Also, the crime alleged must have been the result of post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), traumatic brain injury, substance abuse, and/or a psychological problem stemming from the defendant’s service in combat. Veteran’s Court does not admit individuals charged with sex crimes or violent crimes. Each individual is evaluated on a case by case basis.

In order to get the case to Veteran’s Court, the attorney may request the judge to transfer the case. The request may be done orally. It is recommended that the attorney bring any and all documentation to support the request, such as evidence indicating defendant is a combat veteran, any history of substance abuse, or that defendant suffers from PTSD. If the judge grants the request, the defendant will receive a hearing at Veteran’s Court.

At the Veteran’s Court hearing, the judge will make a determination of whether or not defendant is eligible for the Veteran’s Court Program. The judge may also continue the matter if more information is needed either from the district attorney or from Veteran Affairs. It is also possible that the defendant may be interviewed by health professionals to determine defendant’s eligibility.

Continue reading "The Benefits of Veteran's Court" »

If you have been previously convicted of a “registerable” offense (an offense listed in Penal Code section 290) in California, then you must register as a sex offender. Additionally, even if the offense you committed is not listed in Penal Code section 290, the judge can still require you to register as a sex offender if the judge determines that the offense you committed was sexually motivated. Once you are required to register as a sex offender, you must do so for life. If you fail to register as required by law, you will be charged in a separate felony case with failing to register as a sex offender in California.

Failure to register as a sex offender is a serious crime. California’s sex offender registration laws are very complex and failure to follow them could lead to a new felony case. But, in order to be convicted of failure to register as a sex offender, the prosecution must show that you had “actual knowledge” of the duty to register. There are many ways prosecutors can show that you had “actual knowledge” of the duty to register. It is thus critical to hire a criminal defense attorney with experience handling these cases. Your attorney can aggressively fight the charges and show that your failure to register was not illegal because you did not have actual knowledge of the registration requirement.

Continue reading "Sex Offender Laws Require "Actual Knowledge" of Registration Requirement - California Penal Code Section 290" »

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" »

There are several instances where an individual may be thinking, “They didn’t read me my rights: my case should get thrown out, right?”

One of the most misunderstood concepts in Southern California criminal law revolves around the “Miranda Rights.”

Most people have heard them all before:

1. You have the right to remain silent.


2. Anything you say can be used against you.


3. You have the right to an attorney present during questioning.


4. If you can’t afford an attorney, an attorney will be appointed to you at no cost to you.

While the rights are easy enough to understand, the application of the Miranda rule is less clear.

Basically, the purpose of the rule is to keep out any statements a defendant makes under very specific circumstances.

In order for Miranda to apply:

• a. The defendant must be in custody or the functional equivalent, AND


• b. There must be an interrogation by a government agent.

Continue reading "Miranda Rights - How Do They Work?" »

On October 19th, the United States Department of Justice issued a memorandum to the United States Attorneys in California detailing a shift in the Department’s policy regarding the investigation and prosecution of federal drug offenses in California. Although the memo is favorable to California’s marijuana laws, in no way does it permit the cultivation, possession, use or distribution of marijuana. The federal Controlled Substances Act continues to make those types of acts illegal.

Specifically, the memo dictates that “individuals whose actions are in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state laws providing for the medical use of marijuana” should not be the Department’s main focus. In fact, the Justice Department will continue to prosecute those individuals or entities relying on state marijuana laws as a pretext for the illegal distribution of marijuana. Most importantly, the memo states that individuals who are in compliance with medical marijuana laws can still be prosecuted in federal court if it serves an important federal interest. Clearly, this exception leaves the door wide open to prosecute individuals regardless of the new Justice Department guidelines.

Continue reading "U.S. Justice Department Issues Memorandum Regarding State Marijuana Laws" »

Identity theft in California consists of stealing an individual's personal identifying information and using it for an unlawful purpose such as obtaining a financial gain or making a tangible purchase. Examples of personal information that can be stolen include Social Security numbers, credit card numbers, bank account numbers, and using someone else's good credit to purchase a vehicle or other property.

California Penal Code Section 530.5(a) is the unauthorized use of personal identifying information of another person. This crime involves any person who willfully obtains personal identifying information of another individual and uses that information for any unlawful purpose, including obtaining, or attempting to obtain credit, goods, services, real property, or medical information without the consent of that person.

Continue reading "Identity Theft - California Penal Code Section 530.5" »

Many in the legal community was stunned on Tuesday, December 15, 2009, when a U.S. District Judge Cormac J. Carney acquitted former Broadcom chief financial officer William J. Ruehle, and dismissed charges of fraud and backdating stock options against former Broadcom CEO Henry T. Nicholas. In citing grounds for dismissal, the judge listed prosecutorial misconduct and lack of evidence as two primary reasons for his decision.

This case is noteworthy because the judge’s decision to dismiss the case in its entirety rather than let it proceed to the jury on the prosecutorial misconduct ground is a very rare exercise of judicial authority. This ruling is especially surprising to some as it came in a high profile case where the federal government had been collecting evidence of alleged backdating of the Broadcom’s stock options for almost two years.

If the dismissal stands, the government will be precluded from ever raising the same allegations again because Judge Carney has dismissed the case already presented to the jury, and Broadcom chief financial officer William J. Ruehle would claim double jeopardy if the prosecution sought to brings the charges again.

To support his dismissal with prejudice, the judge cited intimidation of witnesses by prosecution and threatening witnesses with additional charges in an effort to shape their testimony. The conduct was particular egregious because those witnesses received grants of immunity and were represented by counsel. The U.S Attorney’s office denied making any threats. However, the judge determined otherwise, and forced the leading prosecutor on this case, Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew Stolper, to sign a non-prosecution agreement with one of the intimidated witnesses. From that point on, other attorneys renewed their prosecutorial misconduct motions. This decision has left a mark on the Los Angeles U.S. Attorney’s Office’s reputation and credibility.

Continue reading "Federal Judge in the Broadcom Case Cites Prosecutorial Misconduct as One of the Grounds for Dismissing Criminal Charges" »

In December of 2009, the Riverside County District Attorney’s office will be celebrating as it opens the most expensive building ever constructed in the Inland Empire. The approximate $128 million price-tag demonstrates that the DA in Riverside County has tremendous political power. At a time when courts are closing for furlough days, the third Wednesday of every month, in an effort to save precious dollars, the beautiful new building featuring copious amounts of marble can be seen as an extension of the political power and ego that the current District Attorney clearly possesses.

The California Taxpayers’ Association is a non-partisan, non-profit organization founded in 1926 to protect taxpayers from unnecessary taxes and to promote government efficiency. Their website, Cal-Tax.org, which highlights recent examples of Government waste, fraud, and mismanagement, referred to the opening of the new DA’s office as a “good-news, bad-news” story. The good news being that when the Riverside County District Attorney's Office moves to its new headquarters, offices will be equipped with used furniture rather than brand new desks, chairs, etc. Buying used furniture will save approximately $5.1 million, the county reported. District Attorney Rod Pacheco had advocated saving even more by simply moving the office furniture from the existing offices, but county facilities managers decided that the old furniture is in such bad condition it could break, and the time frame for the installation of furniture is very tight.

Continue reading "Grand Opening of New Riverside District Attorney Building Highlights the DA's Political Power" »

The city of San Diego is situated along the Pacific Ocean in the Southwest part of California. Known for its record size naval fleet, the 372.1 square mile city attracts tourist and business class alike, nationally ranking San Diego as the eighth biggest city in population. Recreational parks Sea World and the San Diego Zoo help support economic growth alongside manufacturing company Qualcomm Incorporated. With so many residents and potential city-dwellers traveling throughout San Diego, arrests are sometimes made for assault which can include battery charges. It is in such instances that an arrested individual may benefit from getting in contact with an experienced San Diego assault defense lawyer.

Charges for assault and battery are usually tied together and happen in San Diego more often than some residents are aware. An argument may escalate or an accident can occur, putting the involved parties on emotional defense which can provoke physical response. Unfortunately, assault, as defined by California Penal Code Section 240, only requires the person to have desired to commit battery, or deliberate physical force on another person. Section 242 says that battery is merely physical contact without consent. In the event of an arrest for battery or assault, you may be left to question your legal rights pertaining to the matter and what course of action may be taken to defend those rights.

The experienced Southern California criminal defense attorneys at Wallin and Klarich are prepared to answer any questions that you may have regarding the assault and/or battery charges being held against you. Our team of San Diego lawyers has been aiding people accused of assault and battery as well as a wide range of criminal offenses for over 30 years. If you have been accused of assault or charged with battery, the confident and aggressive lawyers at Wallin & Klarich will build a strong defense on your behalf to help you reach a positive outcome in your case. Your trial can be successful with one of the many defenses to an assault or battery charge, such as lack of ability to follow through with the assault, defending a disabled party, under the influence, and self-defense. For more information on how the attorneys at Wallin & Klarich can help you with your case, please call 888-280-6839 or visit www.wklaw.com today.

Some members of the local legal community were surprised on Tuesday, December 15, 2009, when a U.S. District Judge Cormac J. Carney acquitted former Broadcom chief financial officer William J. Ruehle, and dismissed charges of fraud and backdating stock options against former Broadcom CEO Henry T. Nicholas. However, the judge did more than just dismiss the case with prejudice on the ground of prosecutorial misconduct, which is likely to preclude the case from ever being prosecuted again.

The judge also launched an attack on the federal prosecutors handling the case scorning them for intimidating and threatening key witnesses and lacking evidence to prove the allegations of backdating stock options in order to lower the Irvine semiconductor manufacturing giant compensation expenses on its financial statements to shareholders.

Broadcom is an Irvine chipmaker that during 10 years of public trading had grown into the largest technological company in Orange County employing 7,200 people worldwide and posting $4.6 billion in revenue in 2008. The trouble for the company started in 2007, when it announced a $2.2 billion in undisclosed compensation expenses as part of backdated stock option grants.

At the initial phase of criminal proceeding, the prosecution was able to secure the testimony of a former administrative assistant who had told former chief financial officer Ruehle that stock option backdating was an error in judgment. However, the prosecution was allegedly involved in intimidating witnesses and threatening their attorneys with filing criminal charges against witnesses in a failed attempt to shape their testimony ahead of the upcoming trial.

Continue reading "Broadcom Case Dismissed: William J. Ruehle and Henry T. Nicholas Exonerated" »