San Diego Criminal Lawyers Blog

Movies about bank robberies are fan favorites, always packed with intrigue and action. From popular westerns like The Ballad of Buster Scruggs and The Long Riders to more modern films such as Ambulance and Now You See Me, bank robberies have been romanticized and somewhat glorified. But how often do they happen in real life, and when they do, are they glorious adventures? The short answer is that yes, they do occur, and no, the penalties often make outcomes anything but glorious. If you have been charged with bank robbery, you need a tough criminal defense attorney at bat for you. 

California Bank Robberies in the News

There have been multiple bank robberies in the Golden State in recent years, including: 

• A pair of individuals were charged with ten bank robberies in Antioch, Benicia, Concord, Sacramento, Suisun City, and Vallejo;
• An Anaheim bank was robbed by a man who also took a hostage before surrendering to police;
• A Lake Forest bank robbery involved a gunshot and a fleeing suspect.

Bank Robbery Penalties 

If you think you are safe enjoying the spoils of a bank robbery, if you were not actually there for the heist, think again. Federal law clearly states that you can be criminally penalized for receiving the stolen money. If the amount involved is under $1000, you are facing a year in prison in addition to fines. When the amount exceeds $1,000, it could mean bigger fines and 10 years in a federal prison. Importantly, these are the exact same penalties that the person who actually robbed the bank could face if they managed the heist without making threats or executing any form of violence.

Things get much more sober when a bank robbery includes intimidation. Even without physically harming anyone or shooting off a gun, just the threat of such harm doubles the potential prison sentence to 20 years. If a victim does suffer harm as a result of the bank robbery, another five years can be tacked on, meaning 25 years behind bars. If anyone is killed during the course of bank robbery, the offender is looking at life in prison, with the possibility of the death penalty in some cases.

The Defense You Deserve

A vigorous defense of these kinds of charges must begin with an exhaustive investigation that includes viewing footage of the robbery in question, meeting with witnesses, evaluating forensic evidence, and looking for exculpatory evidence—that which plays in your favor—in the hopes of exonerating you. After getting a good handle on what the prosecutor has to work with, a good defense attorney will develop a strategy to defend you. That could mean a lot of things, including: 

• Presenting alternate theories of the case;
• Focusing on technical or procedural errors;
• Demanding accountability for utter constitutional violations by law enforcement or prosecutors.

Continue reading

Many people do not realize it, but police routinely interrogate a suspect and lie about the possibility that leniency can be traded for cooperation or even about the evidence they have. Richard Leo, a renowned expert on interrogation techniques, calls deception the most defining and salient feature of interrogations in this country. 

And it is perfectly legal. In fact, the courts are aware of and sanction the practice. Furthermore, deceptive techniques are a part of police training across the country. Of note, while lying is widely used to get confessions and information from people law enforcement has in custody, it is a custom that is either totally prohibited or heavily restricted in the majority of peer nations, including Japan, Germany, France, and England. It makes one wonder why other developed nations are so resistant to law enforcement deception.

Issues 

Arguably, the objective of lying is not necessarily to get to the truth. It is to get information or a confession. By falsely influencing a suspect’s perception of their situation, the suspect can be overwhelmed into thinking they have no option other than to confess to the crime and hope they will be treated with leniency. 

Of course, police frequently get a confession out of a suspect who has been lied to. Unfortunately, those confessions are often not legit. Nonetheless, they weigh heavily on the scale of evidence and can lead to a wrongful conviction. When the Innocence Project successfully fought to overturn 375 wrongful convictions, they discovered that almost one-third involved false confessions that police had induced. And when it came to murder convictions that were overturned, more than 60% involved false confessions. While a critical problem, this is not the only concern with the police practice of lying to suspects:

• To be clear, any suspect is innocent until proven guilty. The ethics of lying to a suspect is dubious at best. Teaching officers to use techniques to deceive citizens seems likely to promote a permissive stance toward deception and diminish the public’s view of law enforcement.
• Research demonstrates that lying in this context often leads officers to lie in other, more troubling areas. Officers who engage in this behavior are more prone to involvement in perjury and/or the falsification of police reports. They may manufacture consent to search, probable cause, or otherwise twist the truth to suit their purposes. Those things are illegal, though they are difficult to identify and punish. 
• Since police so often get away with lying, and because it carries over into other areas of their duties, constitutional protections get abused, leaving civil liberties, justice, and public trust at a loss.

Continue reading

If you are headed for a criminal trial, you are relying on your attorney to create reasonable doubt of your guilt in the minds of the jury. What does that mean, and how is it achieved? 

The Meaning of Reasonable Doubt

The prosecution has the burden of proof, meaning they must present proof that you are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. In other words, the jury must be definitively convinced that you are guilty. If they have any doubts as to your guilt, they must be based on common sense and reason, not simply speculation. Their doubt can be grounded in evidence–or the lack thereof—all of which must have been weighed with vigilance and impartially. Anything short of finding reasonable doubt means a jury must find you guilty. What does that mean for your defense attorney?

Crafting Reasonable Doubt 

The importance of the fact that the law considers you innocent until proven guilty cannot be understated, and proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt—an extremely high legal standard—is the burden of the prosecutor. Intended to protect innocents from wrongful conviction, the reasonable doubt standard can be difficult to achieve. That being said, your defense attorney will assault the prosecution’s case on numerous levels in order to demonstrate that the prosecution did not prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.  Some strategies might include:

• Challenging witness credibility by emphasizing a witness’s criminal history, hidden motivations, or potential biases that might sway their testimony;
• Highlighting any procedural errors made by police, including there being issues with the legality of a search, a failure to Mirandize you, or mishandling of evidence, for example;
• Pointing out issues with the analysis of the evidence by bringing in expert witnesses who interpret the evidence differently or who question the soundness of the analysis or the science behind the technology;
• Underscoring inconsistencies in the prosecution’s case, such as conflicting witness statements or ways in which various evidence points to different conclusions;
• Emphasizing the lack of convincing evidence provided by the prosecution and insisting that the prosecution did not meet its burden of proof;
• Providing a strong alibi for you, showing how and why you could not have committed the crime;
• Offering alternate theories of the case by suggesting different timelines, suspects, or motivations that seem plausible.

Goals

Naturally, any defendant is hoping and praying for an acquittal, allowing you to go on with your life and put the trial behind you.  Other favorable scenarios that are possible a strong defense is presented include: 

• Dismissal: The judge might find that the prosecution simply cannot meet the high burden of proof and could dismiss the case before it ever gets to the jury.
• Plea Bargain: The prosecution could fear a shift in the jury toward the defense and offer an advantageous plea deal for you to consider.

Continue reading

The implementation of social media by prosecutors and police to investigate and prosecute criminal activity has seen a marked increase in recent years. Because relatively few legal restrictions on the use of such media exist for them, it’s an easy access point. Social media—including posts in places like Instagram and Facebook, texts, and emails, can provide a range of potential evidence that can be used by police and prosecutors to build a case against any given suspect. Social justice advocates and others, though, have concerns that vulnerable fragments of society are being marginalized and stigmatized when social media is used in this way. Public defenders, as well, have grievances related to their disadvantage when having access to certain social media. 

How is Social Media Impacting Investigations?

There are several ways in which law enforcement can use social media during a criminal investigation: 

• Determining the location of a suspect through geo-tagging; 
• Monitoring posts for evidence of criminal associations or activities;
• Interfacing with suspects using undercover profiles;
• Influencing the direction an investigation takes.

Additionally, since many law enforcement agencies have their own public social media sites these days, they can paint a picture of who they believe is involved in crime, which often fortifies stereotypes. One study, in fact, found that although Blacks made up just 20% of those arrested for those crimes,  they were called out in about one-third of posts related to crime.

Using it as Evidence in the Courtroom

When prosecutors introduce evidence from social media, it can be very damaging to defendants. Many assume that social media accurately reflects an individual’s reality, even though we know that a lot of bravado and swagger goes into posting, as people attempt to impress various audiences. Without question, the social norms dictating behavior in various communities could easily be misinterpreted, leading to suspicion and negative conclusions directed at young Black men and others. This has been a consistent concern in gang cases and in cases related to sexual violence.

Unequal Access

Much of this type of evidence is protected by privacy laws from non-government agencies, which are therefore barred from accessing it. Instead of getting the cooperation given to law enforcement in so many of these cases, defense attorneys find themselves struggling to get social media companies to share information. Even when they do get access, it is often very limited, making it much less useful in court.

Defendants Should Avoid Social Media

After being charged with a crime, defendants are encouraged to stay away from social media because it will likely be monitored by opposing counsel. Anything prosecutors get their hands on could later be presented in a negative light.  Best for unwitting defendants to avoid giving prosecutors ammunition to use against them in court. Continue reading