Criminal Law News

Former Penn State football coach Joe Paterno died of lung cancer last week.  San Diego criminal defense lawyers believe that his absence will affect legal proceedings against 2 college officials who have been charged in the sex abuse scandal at the college.

Paterno had been expected to testify at the trials of 2 Penn State officials, who have been charged in the child sex scandal involving former assistant coach Jerry Sandusky.  Sandusky faces multiple charges of child sexual abuse, involving allegations that he molested young boys who were part of a foundation he operated.

The 2 Penn State officials, Tim Curley, who was the former athletic director at Penn State and Gary Schultz, senior vice president for finance and business, had been charged with failure to report to authorities when they became aware of the sexual abuse of children by Jerry Sandusky.

In January, in a testimony before a grand jury, Paterno said that he informed both Curley and Schultz that a former graduate assistant Mike McQueary had told him that he witnessed an incident of sexual assault involving Jerry Sandusky and a young boy in a shower at a Penn State facility.  The incident allegedly occurred in 2002.  McQueary also testified that he had informed both Curley and Schultz about the sexual assault.

Schultz has since retired, while Curley is on administrative leave.  With Paterno’s death, the case against Curley and Schultz has lost some weight.  Now, much of the case will depend on the testimony by McQueary.  The grand jury testimony by Paterno is not likely to be admissible because he was not cross-examined at the time.  Lawyers for Curley and Shultz now no longer have an opportunity to question Paterno’s credibility because he’s deceased.

The California Supreme Court has agreed to review the state’s medical marijuana laws to eliminate much of the confusion that has swirled around these laws.  Last week, the Supreme Court voted unanimously to review the regulation of marijuana dispensaries by local cities and counties.

The Supreme Court is specifically expected to address whether local governments have the authority to bar marijuana dispensaries which are permitted by Proposition 215.  California’s voters have approved Proposition 215 which legalized the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes under a doctor’s recommendation.  However, there has some opposition to these medical marijuana dispensaries.

Federal law does not recognize Proposition 215, and under federal law, the distribution of marijuana in all forms and in any manner is considered illegal.  However, California has approved the medicinal use of marijuana.  Federal and state laws on this matter have conflicted several times, and because of the lack of a coherent court opinion of the on the subject, confusion has reigned supreme.  California criminal defense lawyers therefore have been especially pleased to learn that the Supreme Court will review the conflict between state and federal law as far as medical marijuana dispensaries are concerned.

Last year, a California court dismissed an attempt to license medical marijuana dispensaries in Long Beach.  In that instance, the Court claimed that the local ordinance went against the federal law against marijuana.  In another case, Riverside won the right to close down medical marijuana dispensaries and ban the opening of new dispensaries, on the same basis.

California criminal defense attorneys believe that it’s high time the Supreme Court weighs in on this matter, and clarifies the position of federal law versus state law on this matter.

The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation is reporting a decline in recidivism rates in the state.  Those rates have fallen to 65%.  Recidivism refers to an individual’s tendency to return to prison either after being arrested again for a crime, or as a result of a parole violation.

According to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation data, the new recidivism rate translates into a 2.4% drop from the previous year.  However, California criminal defense attorneys would advise some caution before over optimism at these reduced recidivism rates.  The fact is that approximately 2/3^rd of all offenders still manage to get back into prison.

Overall, last year, 2, 766 fewer inmates returned to prison.  These resulted in a total savings to prison authorities of about $30 million.  The number one reason for recidivism last year was parole violations.  These violations made up about 45% of repeat visits to prison.   Only 3% of persons returning to prison were sent back after they were involved in crimes.  About 7% of these persons were involved in property crimes and drug crimes.

Most sex offenders who returned to prison did so not because of a new sex crime, but because of parole violations.  Overall, 84% of sex offenders ended up back in prison because of a parole violation.  The data from the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation also finds that inmates who have received substance abuse treatment are less likely to return to prison than those that do not receive such treatment.

Female convicts are about 11% less likely to return to prison over a period of about 3 years after release, compared to males.  Also, persons who suffer from developmental disabilities are much more likely to return to prison.  Overall, the data from the California Department of Corrections And Rehabilitation shows that 99% of convicted murderers who were paroled since 1995, have not returned to prison.

If a new bill proposed by Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York does go through and becomes law, then price gouging, or inflating the prices of pharmaceutical drugs that are already in short supply, could be categorized as a federal crime.

Senator Schumer says that he is currently proposing a bill that would allow the U.S. Department of Justice to come down heavily on pharmaceutical companies that sell potentially life-saving medications that are in short supply, to hospitals at heavily marked up prices.  Violators of the law could pay penalties of up to $500 million for each price gouging.

Drug shortages have been raging through American hospitals, and health regulators have been reporting shortages of some of the most important medications for cancer, pain control, infections and even anesthetics.  The shortage is especially severe for generic medicines.  Some drugs have been eliminated from the market, because companies have chosen to stop production of those drugs that have poor margins, while other drugs are unavailable due to limited supplies of ingredients.

Obviously, these shortages are gravely concerning because they impact patient safety.  According to one report, at least 15 patient deaths since 2010 were caused due to drug shortages.

Senator Schumer says that forcing hospitals to buy vital and potentially life-saving drugs at hugely inflated prices is unethical, and should also be illegal.  The Senator is currently working on finding cosponsors for the bill.  Last month, the Senator had also requested the Federal Trade Commission to conduct an investigation into the practice of price gouging in the industry.

There’s been a lot of attention on pharmaceutical drug shortages recently, and several lawmakers have also been in touch with President Obama, about the issue.  Arizona criminal defense lawyers therefore expect that Senator Schumer’s proposed bill will garner plenty of attention, and possibly gain a lot of support.

Alabamians, who want to enjoy their drinks this holiday season, might want to think twice before they drive after those drinks.  Your chances of being arrested for DUI in Alabama are likely to increase in the next few days as law enforcement activities across the state increase.

The Alabama Law Enforcement and Traffic Safety Division in cooperation with local law enforcement agencies as well as the Alabama Highway Patrol has increased activities this holiday season.  A state-wide anti-DUI campaign is currently underway. The campaign against DUI will also include a campaign enforcing seat belt and child restraint use.  Officers will also be looking for motorists driving above the speed limits.  However, the primary objective of the campaign will be to pull intoxicated drivers off the street.

Over the next few days, Alabama motorists can expect an increased number of saturation patrols, checkpoints, line patrols and LIDAR details.  The, Alabama Highway Patrol is expected to especially target those areas that have a higher incidence of drunk driving accidents.  If you’re driving in these areas, you’re much more likely to be pulled over for DUI, and may have a sobriety test administered.

To avoid spending your holiday talking to an Alabama DUI lawyer, avoid driving after you have had a few drinks.  It’s not always easy to judge whether you are legally intoxicated or in a condition to drive.  If in doubt, don’t drive at all.  Hire a taxi service, or designate a driver for the evening.  The consequences of a DUI conviction in Alabama can be very serious.  You could be looking at jail time, license suspension or revocation.  You could be required to install an ignition interlock device in your car or be required to take a mandatory alcohol treatment program.

A 7-year-old boy in Boston faces suspension from school and a possible transfer to another school after school district officials began an investigation into charges of sexual harassment against him.  The charges stem from a scuffle with another boy, in which the 7-year-old allegedly kicked the other boy in the testicles.

According to Tara Lynch, her 7-year-old son Mark Curran had a fight with another boy on the school bus on November 22nd.  During that altercation, she says that the other boy tried to choke her son, and her son reacted by hitting the other boy in the groin.  The school has classified the case as sexual harassment, and school officials have begun an investigation into the boy’s behavior.  According to school officials, any kind of inappropriate touching between students would fall under the category of sexual harassment.  Once the investigation is complete, the school says that it will make a decision about who is to be punished.

Lynch has already received a letter from the school principal informing her that her son has been accused of violating the harassment codes of the school, and endangering the physical safety of other students.  He’s likely to be either transferred to another school or suspended.

No one is denying that sexual harassment and sexual assault does take place in schools.  However, to criminalize a youthful scuffle between 2 boys seems extreme.  It’s hard to imagine that a groin punch contained any sexual connotations for a 7-year-old.  This incident also remindsCalifornia criminal defense lawyers of a bizarre case out of New Jersey last year in which two 14-year-old boys were labeled sex offenders, after a schoolyard fight, in which they pulled down their shorts and sat bare-bottomed on the face of a classmate.  A judge deemed that the boys’ behavior was meant to sexually insult the other boy, and therefore, they deserved to be labeled sex offenders.

Illinois police, who arrived at the scene of a DUI accident involving an underage driver, were not expecting the teen’s explanation for the accident.  By the time police arrived, the eighteen-year-old driver had driven her car into a ditch.  Police found that she was extremely intoxicated, and also very angry.  The reason for her intoxicated driving, she told police officers, was that her boyfriend had failed to take her to see the latest installment in the Twilight movie series.  That’s what it says on the sheriff’s report about the accident.

However, law-enforcement officers were not as distressed with the boyfriend’s failures as the teen was.  She was immediately slapped with charges of driving under the influence and unlawful consumption of alcohol by a minor.

It’ll take more than such excuses to help an underage driver in California caught driving under the influence of alcohol.  California has some of the toughest laws against underage drinking in the country.  While .08% is the BAC level legally allowed for the adult motorist population, underage drinkers are prevented from driving with any amount of alcohol in their system.  The bar is set much higher for underage drinkers, and the consequences for persons below the age of 18 who are found driving under the influence of alcohol, can be severe.

That means that an underage driver in Los Angeles, driving with a BAC level of even 01%, can require the services of a Los Angeles DUI attorney.  Underage drivers who are caught driving with a BAC level of .05% or greater can be charged with not only underage DUI, but also regular DUI.  These persons can also be arrested for DUI.

Unfortunately, it doesn’t take that much alcohol to result in a .01% BAC concentration level, a fact that many teenage drinkers tend to forget.

Prisons in Alabama have nearly as twice as many prisoners as they are equipped to hold.  According to Alabama’s Attorney General the problem of prison overcrowding in the state could be resolved by releasing inmates who are deemed not likely to commit violent crimes.

In the current economic situation, the idea of releasing nonviolent prisoners to free up space in prisons and balance budgets, has taken root in several cash-strapped states.  Precedents for releasing inmates to solve prison crowding problems exist around the country.  In California, a Supreme Court-ordered program of releasing inmates who have been convicted for low-level offenses is expected to resolve some of the massive congestion in that state’s prisons.  Alabama’s prisons have similar overcrowding problems.

Speaking to a panel discussion held at the conservative think tank Federalist Society in Washington, Alabama Attorney General, Luther Strange talked about the financial pressures of having a prison population that is at least 195% of the maximum capacity of the system.  Releasing some inmates would help decongest these prisons, and lighten the burden on corrections budgets.

However, Alabama criminal defense lawyers do not believe that any such measures to reduce prison populations by releasing harmless inmates, will be popular.  This is in spite of the fact that according to some estimates, between one third and half of all inmates of major prisons around the country can be released without any major threat to public safety.  This release could save millions of dollars in corrections budget.   For instance, some criminals who have been convicted of minor offenses could easily be released without there being a major threat to public safety.  These prisoners cost thousands of dollars a year to incarcerate.

Gov. Jerry Brown’s budget director has been facing calls to resign after she was arrested for driving under the influence.  Ana Matosantos says she has offered to resign, but Governor Jerry Brown has not accepted her offer.

Matosantos, who serves as finance director in the Brown administration, was pulled over after California Highway Patrol officers noticed her vehicle drifting out of its lane.  The officers began to follow her, and noted that the registration had expired.  They pulled her over, and subjected her to a field sobriety test.  She was then arrested on suspicion of misdemeanor DUI, and taken to the Sacramento County Jail, where she was subjected to a breath test.  The results of the test have not been revealed.

Matosantos has released a statement in which she has accepted responsibility for her actions, and called her behavior in driving under the influence “reckless and irresponsible.”  Matosantos served as deputy budget director under former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.  In 2009, she was promoted to her current position, and was retained by Gov. Jerry Brown when he took over in January.

Whether you are a high-ranking official in the California administration, or an ordinary citizen, Los Angeles DUI defense lawyers find that the consequences for a DUI are the same.  What Matosantos has to deal with, in addition as a public official arrested for driving under the influence, is the unwanted media scrutiny and publicity that a DUI arrest can generate.

However, a DUI arrest for any citizen can result in penalties that include fines, driver’s license suspensions and jail time.  Additionally, a conviction for driving under the influence will remain on your record, possibly interfering with your employment and higher education prospects.

A bill that has just been passed by the California legislature would prohibit law enforcement officers from taking e-mails, pictures and other personal data from the cell phone of a person under arrest without a warrant.

Currently, if a person is arrested in California, law enforcement officers can access e-mails and other personal data from their cell phone.  If the bill becomes law, they will need a warrant.  If the governor signs the bill, it will also override a Supreme Court ruling that held that it was legal for police officers to go through a person’s cell phone during an arrest.  Cell phones and other electronic communication devices will be safe from the prying eyes of law enforcement.

If the bill does indeed become law, then San Diego criminal defense lawyers believe that it will be a huge victory for the privacy rights of Californians.  A person who has only been arrested and not convicted of a crime has a right to privacy, and those rights need to be respected.  Several other states have banned police officers from accessing cell phones and other communication devices of people who are arrested.  For instance, Ohio banned the practice back in 2009, when the Ohio Supreme Court ruled that police had no right to access a person’s cell phones without a search warrant.

Besides cell phones, this law could also cover a number of other electronic devices, including laptops, notebooks, iPads, and tablet computers.  Additionally, electronic data that a person may have in a digital camera, video cameras, audio recorders, pen drives, hard drives and gaming devices could all be off-limits to police officers.  Law enforcement officers have defended their rights to access cell phones of people who are arrested, because they can get information about criminal or illegal activity.