criminal defense

October 7, 2016

Defendants’ Intent the Central Question in Oregon Standoff Trial

Now that Ammon Bundy, his brother, and the other co-defendants (nicknamed, the “Bundys“) involved in the destruction and occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge have been set for trial, a jury must now decide whether the defendant’s actions and intent amounted to a crime. Several defendants have already pleaded not guilty to the federal charge of conspiring to impede U.S. Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service agents from doing their job at the refuge through intimidation, threats, or force. Five of the seven are also charged with possession of firearms in a federal facility. Another two face an additional count of government property theft.

Legal experts have been closely watching this case because prosecutors must put to rest the crazy constitutional arguments the defendants have come up with. The trial in Portland’s downtown federal courthouse is expected to last more than two months. In order to convict the Bundy’s prosecutors must prove that two or more defendants conspired to keep federal employees from carrying out their work at the refuge by threat and intimidation charge, a federal intimidation charge. District Judge Anna Brown has already told potential jurors that the case is “all about mental state.” This means they can only be found guilty if prosecutors prove defendant’s criminal intentions. It is reported prosecutors will use defendant’s statements on social media, videos, and news conferences as evidence.

Mens Rea and Actus Reas: The Two Elements of a Crime

October 5, 2016

Could 1,000 Traffic Tickets be Tossed Out Because of Red Light Camera Error?

by David M. Boertje

In Orange County, California, it is reported that the traffic light at Katella Avenue and Bloomfield Street in Los Alamitos switched from yellow to red faster than state law allows, likely causing hundreds of camera-generated tickets to be issued incorrectly, at about $500 apiece. This occurred over a 10-month period. It is an issue because the camera at the intersection photographs drivers that do not make the red light. Los Alamitos’ city manager says that about 1,000 tickets were issued at the intersection in question. At least 19 of those tickets have been tossed out of court.

It was reported last year, that the number of red light cameras being used are surprisingly declining across Southern California and most of the country. In California, 60 cities and counties have ended red-light camera programs. In Orange County, only two cities left are using them – Los Alamitos and Garden Grove. It is cited that declining revenues, a non-supportive court system, and the increasing number of accidents are the main reason many cities have ended their red light camera programs in recent years. Interviewed city traffic engineers claim that photo enforcement is actually causing more rear-end accidents because people are scared when they see a yellow light at an intersection with cameras.

El Cajon and San Diego suspended their red light camera programs back in 2014, and the LAPD in Los Angeles discontinued their program effective July 11, 2011. California hands out harsher penalties than most states for red-light violations – from $490 to $554 when traffic school fees are included – and considers the ticket to be a moving violation.

September 30, 2016

California Wants to Make it Easier to Prosecute Old Rape Cases; Passes Minimum Sentencing Law on Rape

by David M. Boertje

In the ongoing saga of rape allegations against comedian Bill Cosby, California has become one of two states that has proposed a law that would extend the statute of limitations in the prosecution of rape cases. The proposed bill, which passed both houses of the Legislature, follows a new law in Nevada that increases the legal deadline for rape prosecution from four to 20 years. In California, the statute of limitations to prosecute a rape case is currently 10 years. Almost three dozen states, including the District of Columbia, have statute of limitations on filing sexual assault charges or lawsuits.

The state’s governor, Jerry Brown, who has had a history of vetoing bills extending legal deadlines for filing lawsuits over child sex abuse, must approve or sign into law the bill by the end of the month.

This bill however, is not the only one Governor Jerry Brown must decide to veto or approve. The California legislature, in response to the outrage over the six-month jail sentence for Stanford University swimmer Brock Turner also passed a bill that would mandate a minimum three-year sentence for those convicted of rape or sexual assault. The proposed bill would eliminate a judge’s discretion to sentence defendants convicted of such crimes to probation. Brock Turner was released from jail earlier this month for ‘good behavior,’ after serving three months (half) of his sentence. Had this proposed law been in place, he would still be in jail.

What are Statutes of Limitations?

Every state has something called a statute of limitations, which is generally defined as the time limit for a criminal or civil action. In other words, once a statute of limitations has passed, one may no longer be prosecuted or sued for his or her crimes. A statute of limitations typically begins to run from the date the injury or crime was discovered.

In California, the state’s code has specific time limits for specific crimes, such as fraud, injury to personal property, and malpractice. The current California statute of limitations on prosecuting felony rape and sexual assault cases is 10 years after the crime occurs, or for incidents involving minors, until they reach the age of 26. Continue reading

September 7, 2016

Stolen Guns Fuel Underground Market for Criminals in California

by David M. Boertje

According to Graham Barlowe, the Special Agent in Charge of the Sacramento office of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, guns are considered just as valuable as cash or jewelry in a home break in. While referring to a recent string of robberies in our state’s capital Barlow stated, “Cash is extremely valuable because it can get you a number of things, but of the commodities that we find that people that are involved in criminal activity are looking for, guns are very high on the list.” At least seven gun stores have been targeted for burglaries in that area this summer.

It is reported that over 34 guns are reported lost or stolen in California every day, adding up to more than 12,000 guns a year. These stolen guns are likely used for future robberies, homicides, or gang activity. In fact, most of the guns being sold in the streets illegally are probably stolen guns that were legally purchased.

Click on this data analysis to see how many guns were reported lost or stolen to California law enforcement agencies from 2010-2015.

September 2, 2016

The ‘Slender Man’ Trial

by David M. Boertje

A Wisconsin Appeals Court recently released two decisions to try the two 12-year-old girls, Morgan Geyser and Anissa Weier, in the “Slender Man” case as adults. For those of you who have not heard of this case, two girls in 2014 admitted to leading their friend into the woods along Interstate 94 and stabbing her 19 times as a means to please the “Slender Man,” an Internet horror meme. Amazingly enough, the two girls have stated that they believed in the existence of this fictional horror character.

The origins of Slender, as Weier called him in interviews with police, can be traced back to a photoshop contest on the Something Awful forums in 2009. A graphic artist inspired by the authors H.P. Lovecrqaft and Stephen King and horror video games like Silent Hill, manipulated an image to show a tall, thin humanoid lurking behind children. The internet then crowd-sourced the story behind Slender Man, making him a legend or ghost story for impressionable minds to believe.

Rolling Stone has come out with an article on how absurd it is to try two 12-year-olds as adults when it is clear there may have been underlying mental illness causing them to believe this story. Morgan Geyser believed she would get to go live at Slender Man’s mansion if she killed her friend, and that he would harm her family if she did not go through with it. She had also been diagnosed with early onset schizophrenia.

Incompetency and Adolescents in Trial

Juvenile courts exist because it has long been understood that children are less culpable for their actions than adults. Research shows their brains are not finished developing, and they are immature.

In California, A.B. 2212 was signed into law on September 22, 2012. It added §709 in the CA Welfare and Institutions Code. It sets forth basic procedures to follow when a minor’s counsel or the court expresses concerns over a child’s competency to stand trial.

A minor is incompetent to proceed if s/he:

“lacks sufficient present ability to consult with counsel and assist in preparing his or her defense with a reasonable degree of rational understanding; or
lacks a rational as well as factual understanding, of the nature of the charges or proceedings against him or her. See Protocol for Competence in CA Juvenile Justice Proceedings.

Incompetency is not an affirmative legal defense. It does not speak to one’s mental state during the crime, it only speaks to whether they can understand their proceedings. It is common practice to treat a defendant until s/he is competent enough to prosecute. Continue reading

August 31, 2016

Prosecutors: Bill of Rights Should not Cover Malheur Occupiers’ Actions

by David M. Boertje

In the saga of the Bundy wildlife refuge occupation, Federal prosecutors in Oregon filed a trial brief outlining their case against the occupiers. Prosecutors noted that that evidence teams recovered more than 20,000 rounds of ammunition. Defendants have claimed they were exercising their first amendment rights, but government prosecutors have rejected these defenses. They note that “Taking a gun into a government office is not First Amendment protected activity.”

The Rights Enumerated in the Bill of Rights are Not Unlimited

The first 10 amendments in the U.S. Constitution is also called the “Bill of Rights.” But constitutional rights are not absolute, and do not automatically have a legal defense for a crime by simply citing a constitutional right. In fact there are plenty of restrictions that have been imposed on other rights by the Supreme Court.

The First Amendment prohibits the impediment of the free exercise of religion, speech, press, the right to peaceably assemble or the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances. Specifically, it says, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

However, the Supreme Court over the years has placed many restrictions on these rights. You are free to exercise your religion for example, but not if it involves human and animal sacrifice. One’s free speech may also not be protected if it falsely defames someone’s reputation, incites violence, threatens someone, reveals a trade or military secret and threatens national security, or if it is deemed to be obscene. When, where, and how speech is expressed is also restricted. The government has put limitations on who can speak, such as students, prisoners, and government employees. It can also restrict your speech if you are blocking a public throughway (ie. street) while doing it. While determining limitations on speech, courts must carefully weigh the value of protecting speech against the countervailing public interests, including public safety.

The second amendment has been mostly invoked in the gun-rights debate as the “right to bear arms” and has been interpreted to include for the purposes of self defense. It states “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

While the NRA would have you believe otherwise, the second amendment is also limited. You cannot point a loaded gun at someone or use it to threaten them, for example. The case of District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008 specified that we have a constitutional right to use firearms for self defense in our private homes. But the opinion did not suggest that right extended to other areas. Continue reading

August 17, 2016

It is Now Perfectly Legal to Take Upskirt Photos in Georgia

by David M. Boertje

In another bizarre legal ruling from a right-leaning state, a Georgia Court of Appeals ruled the state’s invasion of privacy laws does not prohibit taking a photo up a woman’s skirt (an “upskirt photo”) unless she is “behind closed doors,” with an expectation of privacy, like in a bathroom stall or dressing room. Otherwise, a secret photo taken without the permission of the woman in a public place like a supermarket or sidewalk is fair game.

In a 6-3 opinion, judges ruled in the recent case of Brandon Lee Gary, a Publix store clerk who was accused of taking upskirt photos of a female shopper, that criminal “invasion of privacy” laws only protect victims if the conduct takes place somewhere that is not “visible to the public.” The problem, the judges note, lays in the language of the law, and that it is up to the state legislature to fix it in the next legislative session. However, the next session will not occur until Spring 2017.

The state of Georgia is not alone. Dozens of states do not have specific laws against sexual harassers taking upskirt photos of women in public. For example, a Washington, D.C. judge ruled in 2014 that a woman does not have a “reasonable expectation of privacy” if she were photographed “clothed and positioned in a public space, even if the photographs in question are incredibly invasive and demeaning.” Often, this kind of behavior is not considered illegal due to technicalities of the wording of laws that have not kept up with technology.

July 22, 2016

California Bill Proposes Mandatory Sentence in Wake of Brock Turner Case

by David M. Boertje

In lieu of the national outrage over the seemingly light sentence of Stanford University swimmer Brock Turner, the state of California has just proposed a bill which would mandate a minimum sentence of three years for crimes of sexual assault. The legislation, Assembly Bill 2888, was introduced by Democratic Assemblymen Evan Low and Bill Dodd and co-sponsored by Rosen and Democratic state Sen. Jerry Hill. Critics warn that while well intended, we forget about prosecutorial discretions and police discretions, which are the main barriers to rape convictions.

Brock Turner, 20, spiraled into fame when he was convicted of three felony assault charges: assault with intent to commit rape of an intoxicated woman, sexually penetrating an intoxicated person with a foreign object, and sexually penetrating an unconscious person with a foreign object. His sentence drew national outrage and increased dialogue on what it means to have White privilege, because he was only sentenced to six months. It is further projected he will only serve three months of that sentence, when he was facing 10 years imprisonment. The jury deliberated for less than two days over the eight-day trial.

Turner was arrested after two male students witnessed him on top of a drunk and unconscious woman behind a dumpster on campus. will be required to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life, but he still remains free on $150,000 bail.

Sexual Assault vs. Rape

Under California law, Turner was indeed convicted of sexual assault (aka sexual battery) rather than rape. Under the California Penal Code, the definition of rape includes “sexual intercourse,” whereas “forcible acts of sexual penetration” is a separate crime. See CA Penal Code § 243.4. In the Turner case, the foreign object under the statute was Turner’s fingers. In fact, California is one of many states that include body parts that are not sexual organs in its statutes on penetration with a foreign object. Thus, rape is a higher offense.

CA Penal Code § 243.4, also known as California’s sexual battery/assault law, specifically prohibits touching the intimate part of another person for purposes of sexual arousal, gratification, or abuse. It can be tried as a misdemeanor or felony. It is tried as a felony when the victim is unaware of the nature of the act (ie. unconscious), unlawfully restrained, or mentally incapacitated to consent. Continue reading

July 20, 2016

California Bill Allows Window Smashing to Save Dogs from Hot Cars

by David M. Boertje

Last month, California lawmakers proposed a new law that would allow people who spot a dog (and presumably any animal) left in a hot car to legally smash the window out to rescue it. Assembly Bill 797, “The Right to Rescue Act,” was drafted by Assemblymembers Marc Steinorth of Rancho Cucamonga, Ling Ling Chang of Diamond Bar, and Kristin Olsen of Riverbank. As of June 6, it was amended in the state Senate, and it is making its way through the legislature. The state Assembly members made a video of themselves sitting in a hot car for 21 minutes to illustrate the dangers of leaving a dog in a hot vehicle could pose.

It is summer. California is known for its heat waves and wildfires during the season. Just this week, as temperatures reached 91 degrees in Sacramento last week, it was reported by the Dodo that a small dog had been left in a hot car. When firefighters arrived on the scene, after being called by a concerned passerby, they found the temperature inside the car had reached 160 degrees. The dog was on the dash, appearing to be panting. When the owners returned back to the car, they were cited and their dog was surrendered to animal control.

Leaving an Unattended Animal in a Car

While the proposed bill would allow bystanders to legally break your window to rescue a dog, it is already a crime in California to leave a pet unattended in a motor vehicle. See CA Penal Code § 597.7. Whether leaving a pet alone is a crime depends on the circumstances. You are guilty of this offense if you leave an animal unattended when:

It is too hot;
It is too cold;
There is no adequate ventilation, food or water;
Or there are other circumstances that could reasonably be expected to cause suffering, disability, or death.

Leaving an animal in a hot car is considered animal abuse. Cars have the greenhouse effect due to the glass, so temperatures surge inside cars by as much as 30 degrees. It is not recommended to leave an animal unattended in a hot vehicle unless the engine is on and the AC is running. It is simply not enough to just leave the window open a crack.

A first time conviction for leaving a pet unattended in a vehicle is an infraction that carries a $100 fine, as long as the animal did not suffer harm. However, well-intentioned people often accuse others of animal abuse when it is not the case. Leaving a husky in a car that has the windows open when the weather is 40 degrees for example, is unlikely to cause harm to the dog. However, a tiny, hairless chihuahua could be a different story. Continue reading

June 22, 2016

Life Under Curfew for American Teens: ‘It’s Insane, No Other Country Does This’

by David M. Boertje

The Guardian came out with an interesting piece on the enforcement of local curfew ordinances and their effect on youth. In the city of San Diego, it is illegal for anyone under the age of 18 to be out past 10pm. The city, using its police department, runs sweeps looking for minors out past curfew in all nine districts. Sometimes the SDPD makes dozens of arrests a night.

Conceived as a crime-reduction tactic, curfews were promoted during the “tough on crime” era of the 1990s. They were motivated by the reasoning that parents should know where their minor children are. In California, the city of Monrovia was the first in the state to enact a curfew ordinance. They touted its successes and from there, curfew ordinances spread like wildfire. These ordinances remain in place decades later.

The strictness of curfews varies by city and state. Baltimore, Maryland, for example, has one of the strictest curfews in the country, while the city of Denver, Colorado only enforces curfew during the summer while school is out. According to available FBI data, there were 2.6 million curfew arrests in the US between 1994 and 2012.

Studies by the American Civil Liberties Union have shown that curfews, while well-intended, are racially biased and only enforced in poorer, minority-filled areas.

Legal Details of San Diego’s Curfew Ordinance

San Diego’s curfew ordinance is specifically found in San Diego Munic. Code § 58.0102. Under its regulations, a minor under the age of 18 cannot be out without being accompanied by a parent or guardian during the week. Those in violation are cited and subsequently sent to a youth diversion program. Parents can also be cited if they knowingly permit their minor child to be out in public during curfew hours. Additionally, curfew hours differ by jurisdiction. In east San Diego, curfew hours are between 10pm and 6am. In Del Mar, Solana Beach, Poway, Escondido, Chula Vista and Coronado they are from 11pm to 5am.

The statute specifies 10 legal exemptions, such as coming home from a game/school activity or job, being involved in an emergency, or running an errand at the direction of your parent. Continue reading