Criminal Law News

When going to the process of expunging documents, many people do not realize the full benefits of using an attorney. It is possible to go through the expungement process alone, or independently of most legal aide. In fact, using a lawyer to help with expungement is never required by courts in the United States, since the constitution grants citizens the right to preside over every aspect of their own criminal hearings if they prefer to. However, having an attorney help with your legal expungement can make the process go more smoothly, and set your mind at ease.

Overcoming Misgivings

Some people are reticent to hire an attorney for a variety of reasons. Some people do not want to ask for help, some people are prejudiced against lawyers, and many are worried about the potential financial cost of hiring extra help. While all of these concerns are common, people who hire attorneys to help with their expungement usually feel that they made the right choice, and saved themselves valuable time. There are a few ways that lawyers can be especially useful during an expungement.

Leverage your Lawyers Experience

When you hire a lawyer to help with expungement, they can help interpret legal documents for you, so that you can fully understand what is being asked of you. This is especially helpful when you are unfamiliar with the legal process, or unfamiliar with legal terminology. Not only can reading through stacks of legal papers be a headache for many people, but it can also lead to misunderstandings and errors from those untrained in interpreting the tricky legal jargon. An attorney or expert also will help you avoid making mistakes during the expungement process, and make sure that you are following every step you need to complete the steps correctly.

Lawyers also know the ins and outs of state law, especially in regards to their area of expertise. Most people are not very familiar with the bylaws and ins and outs of the criminal laws in their state, and how those laws relate and interact to federal laws. On the positive side, lawyers can be extremely helpful in negotiating the often rough waters of the nuances and subtleties of the laws in your area. A doubly positive benefit of this is that you will not have to study up on every single law that relates to your expungement- you can just have the condensed version given to you by someone who knows all about it already.

Leave it to the Professionals

If you are hiring a lawyer to help you with expungement, you not only have a support system, as that attorney will likely have a team of paralegals and other researchers helping on your case. In addition, you will also get to sit back and relax a little bit more. When you do your own expungement, there is a lot of extra work, heavy legal reading, and schlepping around town and state offices. Why not let someone do the brunt of that work for you?

When going through an expungement, your lawyer can help you with state laws, they can be an advocate and support system through your experience, and they can also navigate the confusing terminology very easily. Not only will you feel better having an expert on your side, but your attorney can make sure that the documents you need sealed will really be sealed, and can keep in contact with the court on your behalf, so you have more time to live your life without the burden of legal jargon, negotiating alone, and learning all of your state’s laws and terminology.

Written by Ellen Cho for the team at the Tennessee DUI Defense Center, where each Nashville DUI lawyer is dedicated to the success of your case and can also assist with DUI record expungement.

Like much of the verbiage used in court proceedings, Arizona rule 32 can easily be misunderstood.  Is it the same as a PCR Petition?  When can you use it?  When should you use it?  All of these questions can easily be answered incorrectly depending on who you ask.  This particular rule will be briefly discussed in this article so you might gain a better understanding of how it can benefit you.

In many court cases, it is common for a defendant to appeal the conviction if they do not agree with the findings.  The individual usually has the ability to file a Rule 32 if the appeal is denied.  While these two courses of action are similar in a few ways, they are not the same things.  However, this rule is the same as a PCR Petition.

Arizona rule 32 is most commonly used in an instance where the defendant feels that their legal counsel was ineffective. This requires a certain amount of solid proof for it to be accepted by the court, but if it is, the defendant may be awarded an evidentiary hearing. In order to prove that your case would have turned out differently if you’d had more effective legal counsel, you must have a strong argument to hand-in-hand with the physical proof you produce.  It is important to remember that opinions are rarely considered solid evidence of any error or misleading advice, and if that’s all you have to support your claim, you’ll probably have an extremely difficult time having it accepted.

Another common reason for filing an Arizona rule 32 is if there was some kind of error made during court proceedings.  In the case of an error occurred during the sentencing portion of your trial, you would most likely have that part re-done to correct the error if possible.

If you have gone through court proceedings and feel that your legal counsel was ineffective in properly defending you, or you believe there was an error that was made during one or more of the parts of your trial, Arizona rule 32 may be of benefit to you.  Doing further research and asking for more information from a reliable source with experience could help you successfully file the allegation.

If you are ever unfortunate enough to be implicated with a DUI charge, you want to make sure that you have the best attorney available. Experience and competency is a requirement. If you are found guilty of a DUI charge, it can take away your freedom, your driving privileges, and in some cases even your career. It is best not to take a chance with a lawyer, but pick out the lawyer that is the best equipped to defend your case.

The first thing that you should look for in a DUI attorney, is you want someone that who can fully scrutinize the police reports. Along with the police reports, they will also look at your testimony. When analyzing the police reports, the lawyer should make sure that the police officer followed proper protocol in conducting and administering the sobriety test. If a police officer doesn’t follow the right protocol, then it is possible that some, if not all of the charges can be dropped.

The next thing that a good DUI attorney will do is that h or she will look at the police reports and be able to tell whether or not the equipment was operating properly. Sometimes, if the sobriety testing equipment hasn’t been properly calibrated, then the results can’t be proven in court. It often happens that these machines are calibrated correctly, and as a result, the court will simply dismiss their results as evidence.

The third thing that a DUI attorney needs to be able to do is he or she needs to determine from the police report whether or not there was a lawful reason for stopping your vehicle. If your vehicle was stopped or pulled over illegally, it could make it so that the prosecuting attorney loses his case against you because it was illegal for them to stop you in the first place.

The fourth thing that a DUI attorney needs to do is he or she needs to be able to appeal to the jury in such a way that they will be able to sympathize with your case. Even if you are found to be guilty, having a good DUI attorney can help to reduce the sentence just by being able to appeal to a jury. Having a good trial lawyer can help you to reduce your sentencing, and most of the time, they should be able to throw out some of the charges even if you are found out to be guilty..

When you choose a good DUI attorney, you want someone that is respectful of your situation, punctual, and someone who has a good record of winning their cases. When you find someone that has all three of those things, you are going to be a lot more happy with the results of your trial.

Spencer is an expert blogger who shares valuable insights about life and current issues. His recent topics are focused on Boise DUI lawyer, and important tips to help you get the best DUI defense attorney for your DUI case.

The United States Supreme Court has dealt a severe blow to the rights of arrested persons, ruling that strip searches even for minor offenses are permissible.  The 5-4 majority decision held that the need to keep weapons, drugs and other contraband out of jails was much greater than an individual’s right to privacy.

The case involves New Jersey citizen Albert Florence, who was pulled over by police, when he was driving with his wife and children in his car.  The officer found that Florence had been named in an earlier warrant, and had a pending fine.  He was arrested, and taken to 2 county jails.  It later turned out that the fine had actually been paid, and that there was no pending warrant at all.

In jail, Florence was subjected to a humiliating strip search.  The strip search procedures involved making him squat and cough, and hold up his genitals.  He was also subjected to a visual inspection by prison guards.

When law enforcement officers found that there was no pending warrant against him, Florence was released.  He filed a lawsuit against both the counties, and the case ultimately went to the United States Supreme Court.

Now the Supreme Court has held that the strip search was justified, and that it was not possible for officials at the county jail to forgo strip searches, just because a person does not look very dangerous.   Supreme Court justice Thomas Kennedy used the example of Timothy McVeigh, who was arrested for a traffic offense, in order to illustrate the reasons for his ruling.

Civil liberties groups and San Diego criminal defense attorneys have strongly criticized the ruling.  In California, there are restrictions on the application of strip searches.  These restrictions are in place to protect individual liberties and prevent arbitrary actions by law-enforcement.

Prosecutors in Cowlitz County in Washington are struggling to provide answers about the quality of their prosecution, after a 23-year-old woman recanted the rape allegations that she had made against her father 10 years ago.  Los Angeles criminal defense attorneys find it extremely unfortunate that the prosecutors involved continue to defend their actions in this case.

In March 2001, Cassandra Kennedy informed her doctor that she had been abused by her father, Thomas Kennedy.   He was prosecuted, and found guilty by a jury.  He was sentenced to 15 years in prison.

He was released earlier this year, after his daughter recanted those claims and admitted that she had lied. .  The daughter, who is now 23 years of age, says that she was overcome with guilt at what she had done, and chose to come clean.

The charges against Thomas Kennedy have been dismissed.  However, prosecutors in Cowlitz County, where the case was prosecuted, said that they can find nothing wrong in the way that they prosecuted the case.  They don’t believe that there was anything that they could have done to prevent this gross miscarriage of justice.

The Cowlitz County prosecutor insists that she will not prosecute Cassandra Kennedy for her lies.  According to her, prosecuting Cassandra would discourage other sex abuse victims from coming forward.  The prosecutor also does not believe that this shocking incident is an indictment of the system.

A man was imprisoned for 10 years for a crime that he did not commit.  Kennedy is 43 years old today, and lost 10 of the best years of his life.  He lived for 10 years with the stigma of a child sex abuser, a label that he did not deserve.  In spite of this, prosecutors don’t seem to believe that there are any lessons to be learned from this tragedy.

A former Los Angeles teacher, who shot into the media spotlight earlier this year after he left his wife and children and moved in with his 18-year-old student, has now been arrested on charges of child sexual abuse.

James Hooker was arrested at his home on charges of oral copulation of a minor.  He has pleaded not guilty, and his bail has been set at $50,000.

Hooker became a household name earlier this year, when he appeared on the Dr. Phil Show, with one of his students, an 18-year-old girl.  The two were living together.  The relationship allegedly began when Powers was a 14-year-old girl, but was platonic until she turned 18.  Hooker claimed that there was no physical relationship until the girl Jordan Powers turned 18 years of age.

That claim is denied by Powers‘mother, who claims that she has text messages to prove that there was a physical relationship between Hooker and Powers even when she was a minor. An investigation into that case is on going.

Hooker has now been arrested for an alleged incident of sex abuse which occurred a few years ago.  The victim is a 17-year-old girl.  The abuse allegedly occurred in 1998, when the girl was studying at a school different from the one where Hooker taught.  There is no information about how Hooker met the girl, but the two struck up a friendship.  Police began an investigation into this case, after Hooker admitted he had moved in Powers.

Hooker’s relationship with Powers has already provided the basis for a proposed new piece of legislation that would prohibit any romantic relationship between a student and teacher, even those that involve an adult student.  California criminal defense attorneys are studying the bill that would allow school employees to be stripped of their retirement benefits, including pension and healthcare if they violate the law.

A California lawmaker is proposing a new scheme for citizens to earn some much-needed cash.  If the lawmaker has his way, persons, who report motorists driving under the influence of alcohol in California, could soon be eligible for a reward.

State Senator Ron Calderón, Democrat-Montebello is proposing the new piece of legislation that would reward persons for reporting intoxicated drivers who are later convicted.  Under the proposal, a California citizen who reports a drunk driver is eligible for a $100 reward.  This intoxicated driver must later be convicted for the person to be eligible for a reward.  According to the proposal, the court would order the intoxicated motorist to pay the reward to the person who reported him.

According to the senator, this bill will help encourage the average California citizen to report intoxicated drivers, and pull them off the road.  It would also help reduce the number of people killed in alcohol-related car accidents every year.

The bill SB 1203 is likely to generate a lot of opposition from San Diego DUI lawyers, who feel strongly that the bill is poorly thought out and creates numerous complications.  Not everyone is cheering for the bill.  Mothers against Drunk Driving which usually adds its weight to legislation like this has decided to delay taking a stand on this.  The American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California has also not commented yet.

Bizarre ideas like this are actually counterproductive to the task of keeping our streets safer.  California’s DUI laws in their present state are some of the toughest in the country.  They have been responsible for taking many drunken motorists off our roads, and the fact is that the state’s roads have never been safer.  There is no need for new legislation that only complicates matters and increases enforcement hassles for the system.

Image by Florian

If you should find yourself in the unfortunate position of having been arrested for a DUI in California, you will be “invited” to participate in two distinct legal processes. You need to navigate through the administrative action that will be generated by the California Department of Motor Vehicles and the criminal action that will take place in the California court system. Both of these matters will coincide with the charges but are handled by separate agencies. This is why the best option you have when arrested for DUI is seeking out a qualified Southern California DUI defense attorney.

In California, the moment you are arrested for DUI, the clock starts ticking. That clock counts down the 10 days for you to request a DMV administrative hearing. If you don’t make that request within those 10 days, then your driver’s license will be automatically suspended. These 10 days include the weekends. If you’re tenth day falls on a Saturday or Sunday, you might be given until the following Monday to make the request for a hearing, but don’t count on that. An experienced Orange County DUI defense attorney will know that making this formal request for a DMV hearing is a top priority when it comes to handling your case.

How DMV Hearing Goes

The typical DMV administrative hearing either takes place over the phone or at a Driver’s Safety office. There are three areas that the DMV Hearing Officer will be focusing on. This will be whether the police had reasonable cause to believe you were driving under the influence, if you were lawfully arrested and if your blood alcohol content was .08% or higher, .08% being the legal limit in California.

Although those questions might seem pretty straightforward, it is clear to see why having a Southern California DUI defense attorney on that phone call is a smart idea. Would you know whether or not there was reasonable cause for your initial arrest? Would you know the plus or minus percentage points when it comes to blood alcohol content? Would you know if that test was properly administered?

As to the outcome of a DMV hearing, you may not receive the final resolution for several days or even a couple of weeks. That resolution will either be to uphold your suspension or to set it aside. If your license is suspended, you have the right to appeal that decision. Going down that road means you definitely want to be in consultation with an experienced Orange County DUI defense attorney.

Keep in mind that all of this is just for the DMV. There is the entire matter that also has to be resolved. When your ability to legally drive is at stake, it only makes sense to get experienced legal help.

Looking for an Orange County DUI lawyer? Kellee C. Parker is an experienced Newport Beach DUI lawyer.

San Diego city officials have decided to close down a police unit that was focused solely on DUI arrest and enforcement.  However, San Diego DUI lawyers do not expect the disbandment to affect DUI enforcement in the city.

The DUI Enforcement Team currently consists of one sergeant and 3 officers.  All 4 of these personnel will now be transferred to the Traffic Unit.  However, they will continue to be available for DUI arrests as well as accident investigations.

The team has been losing personnel for a while now, because of retirements and reassignments.  New personnel have not been added on because of staffing shortages.

However, according to police representatives, they do not expect any effect on the DUI enforcement in San Diego city as a result of this disbandment.  That is because most of the DUI arrests in the city are made by officers of the Traffic Unit.  There are currently 80 officers in this particular unit.  Other arrests are made by patrol officers across the City.

Representatives of the Police Department have hastened to add that the disbandment of the DUI unit has nothing to do with the misconduct charges leveled against some of its officers.  The DUI unit has struggled with allegations of misconduct leveled against some of its senior officers.  Former officer Antony Arevalos was sentenced to 9 years in prison earlier this month after he was found guilty of soliciting sexual favors from women he arrested for DUI.  Several women came forward to allege that he sexually harassed them during the arrest, and offered to drop the charges in return for sexual favors.

The DUI team has also struggled with other allegations of inappropriate behavior.  Former Sgt. Kevin Friedman also faces charges of destroying a seatbelt citation for a Deputy District Attorney.

Seal Beach has decided to join the long and growing list of California cities that have banned persons convicted of sex offenses from entry into public parks and other spaces.  Last week, the Seal Beach City Council give initial approval to a rule that would ban sex offenders from Seal Beach parks, piers, beaches, jetties, as well as parking lots in these areas.

The rule will be taken up again at the next meeting, and if it is approved then, Seal Beach will join a long list of California cities that have implemented similar laws.  California criminal defense lawyershave been dismayed to see a number of cities including Huntington Beach, La Habra, Los Alamitos, Laguna Hills, Irvine, Mission Viejo, Westminster, Yorba Linda, and Rancho Santa Margarita implementing similar bans.

According to estimates, there are currently about 10 registered sex offenders in Seal Beach.  Seven of these live in a retired community.  Under the new law, any person who is a federal sex offender registry is banned from entering recreational areas where children gather.  Any violation would constitute a misdemeanor, and the first conviction would be punishable with a maximum of 6 months in jail, or a fine of up to $500.

This trend of forcing sex offenders out of public areas began with Fullerton in Orange County which became the first city in the county to ban persons convicted of sex crimes from entering within 300 feet of day care centers, schools parks, and other places where children gather.  Different cities have different versions of the law.  For instance, Irvine bans only those persons who have been convicted of abusing minors.

However, no matter what the scope or extent of the ban, it only discriminates against persons who have already served out their sentences, and want to reintegrate into society.  Further, such blatant discrimination against persons convicted of sex crimes only alienates these people, and increases recidivism rates.