Sacramento Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

A central tenet of the U.S. criminal justice system is presumption of innocence, a safeguard of the rights of American citizens since the nation's founding. In today's media saturated world, however, where information zips from terminal to terminal in seconds and people believe they know the truth because they have read something online or seen something on TV, it's important to remind ourselves of the importance of the presumption of innocence, which places the burden on state prosecutors to prove guilt, not on the accused to demonstrate innocence.

Considering someone innocent until proven guilty is actually not explicitly stated in the U.S. Constitution. Instead, it is implied in various amendments such as the Fourth Amendment prohibition against unreasonable searches by the government, the Fifth Amendment guarantee that a person cannot be compelled to be a witness against himself, and the Sixth Amendment rights of the accused to confront witnesses against him and to have the assistance of legal counsel. Through court decisions and federal and state laws, presumption of innocence has been infused throughout our criminal justice system.

Of course, this presumption applies only to the government, in the persons of law enforcement and the judiciary. It does not apply to the news media and private citizens. When confronted with a crime, they are free, because of the First Amendment, to make any suppositions they desire about who did what to whom and why.

The problem is that often this speculation is based on incomplete and incorrect evidence. Law enforcement, prosecutors, and defense attorneys are sometimes precluded by court order from disclosing details of a live case, but usually they refuse to divulge information for the simple, essential purposes of protecting the privacy of people involved as well as preserving the integrity of the legal system as a whole. The fact is that when a criminal complaint is filed, it is often based on untested information: a witness who hasn't been subjected to cross-examination, a portion of an audiotape or videotape that hasn't been reviewed in total, an investigation that is incomplete.

Continue reading "Presumption of Innocence and Electronic Media" »

As a follow up to our last post comparing felonies, misdemeanors, and infractions, today's post reviews expungement, the process by which some people can have convictions removed from their criminal records.

California Penal Code 1203.4 provides certain people convicted of crimes the opportunity to have their criminal records expunged. Expungement is meant for people who were found guilty of a crime but have subsequently turned their lives around. It is critical to remember that the criminal record remains; instead of a conviction, though, it shows a dismissal of the charges.

To qualify for expungement, a person must have completed probation, paid all fines and restitution, not spent time in state prison for the offense, and not currently have any criminal charges pending.

The person seeking the expungement has his/her attorney file a petition with the court asking for the case to the reopened and the conviction set aside. The petition identifies the previous conviction and describes the reasons the court should change the record from conviction to dismissal. Backing evidence, such as a written statement by the petitioner and letters from people who can attest to the petitioner's quality of character, is submitted to the judge for review. The role of the attorney is to convince the court that the petition has merit.

In most instances, expungement allows a person who has a conviction to say truthfully on an employment application that he has not been convicted of a crime. No matter the circumstances, expungement is seen as furthering justice and letting people who have become productive, law-abiding citizens the chance to participate in and contribute to society.

Continue reading "Expungement of a Criminal Record" »

As part of our ongoing effort to provide Sacramento Valley residents with a working understanding of our criminal justice system, today's post outlines the differences among felonies, misdemeanors, and infractions.

California defines criminal behavior primarily through its Penal Code, Vehicle Code, and Health and Safety Code. Crimes in each of these areas are divided into felonies, misdemeanors, and infractions. The category a crime falls into depends on the severity of the offense and the existence of any prior convictions on a defendant's record.

Infractions are the least severe and come with fines of up to $250 and no possibility of jail time. Examples are traffic tickets and some city ordinances.

Misdemeanors carry penalties of up to one year in county jail, fines of up to $1000, counseling, and/or work project. Examples include petty theft, reckless driving, first time DUI, simple assault and battery, possession of less than one once of marijuana, and under age drinking. Defendants in misdemeanor cases have the option to waive their right to appear in court and allow their attorney to appear for them.

Felonies constitute more serious offenses and carry the possibility of state prison terms of 16 months or longer, a combination of probation plus up to one year in county jail, stiffer fines, and in extreme cases even the death penalty. Examples of felonies include drug possession and distribution, sexual assault, aggravated assault, felony DUI, grand theft, arson, and homicide.

Some crimes - assault, DUI with injuries, drug possession, theft, vandalism, for example - are "wobblers," meaning they can be charged as misdemeanors or felonies depending on the circumstances.

Continue reading "California Felonies v. Misdemeanors v. Infractions" »

A U.S. Supreme Court decision delivered this past spring has forced states to review the circumstances when crime lab technicians are required to testify in court about their reports. While this ruling has generally been praised by criminal defense attorneys, it has resulted in some confusion as state courts interpret and apply it. In fact, the situation is so muddled in California at this point, that two different state appellate courts - one in Sacramento and one in Los Angeles - have come up with opposite rulings even though the cases they confront are nearly identical.

Here's the background: The U.S. Supreme Court in June delivered its opinion in Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, a case that asked this question: Are crime lab reports akin to business records, factual documents that can be submitted into evidence without cross-examination of the preparer, or are they "testimonial" in nature, with the perspective and bias of any witness for the prosecution, and thus subject to the Sixth Amendment's guarantee that the accused can confront and cross-examine witnesses?

Criminal defense attorneys were pleased when the Court declared that crime lab reports were testimonial and that defendants had to be able to cross-examine lab personnel. This is critical because defense attorneys need the opportunity to question technicians on their overall expertise, as well the procedures used in the preparation of specific lab reports. Though most reports are factually accurate, some are faulty, and defendants and their lawyers need the opportunity to "confront" the government's witnesses.

While many states had allowed lab reports to be submitted into evidence as factual documents (like an accountant's audit, for example) without the testimony of the preparer, California already had the practice of providing defense lawyers the opportunity to cross-examine lab personnel. This was even discussed during oral arguments before the Supreme Court for Melendez-Diaz.

But an interesting repercussion of this decision has already arisen here in California. Two different California appellate courts this summer came up with opposite applications of the Melendez-Diaz ruling. In one case, a state appellate court in Los Angeles ruled that it was okay for a member of the coroner's staff to testify about the contents of a report even though that person had not actually done the analysis. In another case, a state appellate court in Sacramento made the opposite ruling, requiring the person who actually did the lab work and wrote the report to appear in court. This is clearly an issue headed to the state Supreme Court, since one of that court's roles is to ensure uniform application of the law through the state.

It is our view that it is critical to have the report writer in court to testify not only to the data the report contains but also to the processes used, the background and expertise of lab personnel, and even the maintenance procedures followed for lab equipment. Defendants - whether accused of DUI, drug possession, theft, murder, or any other crime - have the right to be certain that law enforcement has followed appropriate safeguards in the acquisition and analysis of evidence and that the data presented in reports is accurate.

Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, U.S. Supreme Court
Oral Arguments for Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts
"Court Weighs Use of Crime Lab Reports at Trial," Associated Press, November 10, 2008
"California Appellate Courts Clash Over Coroner Testimony," Law.com, August 27, 2009

The pervasiveness of social media - email, Facebook, Twitter, Second Life - and the ability of people to access data online through search engines such as Google, Yahoo, and Bing are having an impact on the conduct of jury trials. Lawyers and judges throughout the country are finding that the age old, simple admonition to jurors to not discuss a case when away from the courtroom just doesn't cut it in our information-saturated world.

In fact, a case here in Sacramento - involving a radio station stunt that resulted in the death of a woman who drank too much water - is believed to be the first in California requiring jurors to sign pledges stating that they will not go online to research topics related to the trial or communicate information to other people using electronic devices.

The concern in criminal trials, of course, is that, particularly for high profile cases, jurors might go online and access information that is incorrect or has been deemed inadmissible. A juror with that information would then come to deliberations with a different perspective on the trial than that of the other jurors.

One of the dangers, though, of banning the use of social media and search engines is that people will turn away even more than they do now from their civic duty of jury service. Judge Gary Randall of Nebraska, speaking today on the NPR program Talk of the Nation, made this point and argued that the drive to ensure that jurors consider only the information presented to them during trial must be balanced with the reality that more and more people are used to having continuous and instantaneous communication with friends and family. In other words, we need to make sure that we have an adequate pool of competent and motivated jurors.

Continue reading "Social Media, Search Engines, and the Courts" »

As we've explained in earlier posts, law enforcement in California is for the most part organized along city and county boundaries. This can make it confusing for people who have been accused of a crime. Whom do you contact to get basic questions answered?

To help, we've assembled a list of websites for agencies people might need to refer to if they or someone they know is arrested in Sacramento, Placer, Yolo, or El Dorado counties. This is not an exhaustive list but does at least provide starting points if you have questions.

Of course, many issues will require the assistance of a criminal defense attorney. Contact the Law Office of Nancy King if you have any questions.

In an upcoming post, we'll discuss what happens when someone is arrested, the procedures that should be followed to ensure that citizens' constitutional rights are protected, and a detailed look at the role of the defense attorney. Until then, for an overview of why a defense lawyer is so important in our legal system, see our September 9 post.

Sacramento County

Sacramento County Sheriff's Department

Sacramento District Attorney's Office

Sacramento County Probation

Sacramento Police Department

Elk Grove Police Department

Citrus Heights Police Department

Continue reading "Contact Information for People Accused of a Crime" »

As the calendar turns toward fall, colleges throughout the nation, including UC Davis and Sac State (CSUS) locally, are welcoming new and returning students as another academic year begins. For most students, college is a time of expanding one's worldview, improving critical thinking skills, and developing a vision of a career path. It's also a time to meet new people and learn to live independently, away from the structure, boundaries, and comfort of home life.

The college environment can seem like a cocoon, insulated from the consequences of the real world, leading some students to think that they can do things that would not be acceptable, or even legal, in the outside world, and not be held accountable. But often there are consequences. Some offenses might come under the purview solely of the campus disciplinary system, but some become the interest of law enforcement. And since the vast majority of college students are 18 years of age or older, they are treated as adults, not juveniles, by the judicial system, which means less tolerance and harsher penalties.

Most of the cases we see involving college students concern DUI, drug possession and sale, assault, vandalism, and theft. More often than not, they involve students who've never been arrested but have now done something unwise and out of character. They drive to a party off campus, drink three or four beers, and then get pulled over by local police as they drive home. They fall in with a crowd that likes to smoke marijuana, and then get arrested for drug possession, or even possession for sale, when police come to their off-campus house to break up a late night party. They get in a fight with a member of the local community who decides he just doesn't like college students. They pull a prank on a rival fraternity and get arrested for damaging property. Or they get arrested for sexual assault against someone they meet at a party or who lives in the same dorm.

The key thing to keep in mind is that once local law enforcement is involved, saying "But I'm just a college student" isn't a defense. Because of problems students have caused over the years, many communities are less likely than before to say, "That's okay. They're just kids." Police officers and prosecutors merely see college students as "the accused." In other words, don't expect any special treatment. Contact a criminal defense attorney and figure out your options.

Continue reading "College Students and the Criminal Justice System" »

Over the last month here in Sacramento, we've witnessed two members of local law enforcement accused of DUI. In August, CHP arrested a Sacramento police officer for drunk driving, and just this past Sunday an off-duty Sacramento County deputy sheriff was arrested for driving under the influence of prescription medication and crashing her vehicle into a Starbuck's and injuring an 80-year old woman.

We bring up these incidents not to ridicule these officers. Rather, they are an important reminder that anyone can find himself in the position of these public servants: humbled and facing prosecution.

These incidents also illuminate the critical role of the defense attorney.

When people hear of incidents such as those described above, they have a mix of emotions but often feel deeply angry. They demand justice to right any wrongs and to punish the accused as examples to discourage others from doing the same thing.

But in our system we don't live by mob rule. Instead we live by the rule of law. We take the power to prosecute away from individual citizens and place it instead in the hands of the District Attorney's Office. Thus the deputy district attorney assigned to each case is law enforcement's advocate, looking at the evidence from that prosecutorial perspective.

To protect the rights of each person from the force of the larger society and the power of the government, our legal system, rooted in our Constitution, says that each of us has the right to a speedy trial, to confront witnesses against us, to be protected against unreasonable searches, and to not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. And in addition to these enumerated rights, we have our legal tradition of presuming a person innocent until proven guilty.

That's where the defense lawyer comes in. Where the prosecutor looks at a case from the perspective of law enforcement, the defense attorney looks at it from the perspective of the accused. The defense attorney protects each defendant's rights. She makes sure that all relevant evidence and arguments are brought forward to explain the incident as the accused experienced it. Juries make final decisions about guilt and innocence and judges, if necessary, determine sentences. But a defense attorney is crucial to ensuring a fair and balanced interpretation of the facts of each case. Without defense counsel, justice cannot be served.

"Sacramento Police Officer Accused of DUI," August 18, 2009, KCRA.com
"Sacramento County Deputy in Crash Has Used Painkillers," September 9, 2009, Sacramento Bee

In our previous post, we tried to shed some light on the differences between state and federal courts, and the superior, appellate, and supreme court levels as they pertain to criminal law. Today we'll briefly outline the difference between criminal and civil law.

The Law Office of Nancy King is a criminal defense law firm handling criminal law cases. These are cases in which the People of the State of California are attempting to convict a person for violation of the state penal, vehicle, or health and safety codes. Take, for example, when a person drinks alcohol, gets behind the wheel, runs a red light, and crashes into another car. All sorts of laws might have been violated, including driving while intoxicated and recklessly. The state, in the person of the local District Attorney, will prosecute the drunk driver and attempt to impose a penalty, such as a suspended license or jail time.

Distinct from these criminal cases, there are also civil law cases, in which one person (or group of people) has a dispute with another person and is trying to get restitution or compensation for damages. So in the example above, the victim of the crash might also file a civil case attempting to get money from the drunk driver (or insurance company) to cover medical expenses or lost wages. Superior courts in California handle both types of cases.

Obviously, quality legal defense is imperative when people find themselves charged with a crime and having to defend themselves in this complicated, imposing system. Call the Law of Nancy King if you have questions on this topic or any of the issues discussed in our posts.

In our August 25 post we outlined the differences and similarities among the various law enforcement agencies citizens might encounter, chiefly the police, sheriff, and CHP. In today's post, we'll review the jurisdiction and structure of the state and federal court systems.

Because of our federal system of government, we have two distinct though related judicial systems in our country. The national, or federal, system, deals with issues and controversies that pertain to the laws enacted under the U.S. Constitution by Congress and the President. For example, since the U.S. Constitution gives the federal government the authority to set up a post office, people who steal mail find themselves in federal court.

Each state also has its own set of laws enacted under its own constitution. Thus, the California state Senate and Assembly and the Governor create laws that fulfill the mandates of the Constitution of the State of California. These laws, though they take many forms, overwhelmingly deal with issues of public health, safety, and order within our communities. For example, laws relating to robbery, theft, assault, drug possession and sale, drunk driving, and murder are determined by each state. To add another layer to this, counties and cities also enact laws particular to their own communities. An example of this is local zoning laws that determine whether land can be used for a residence, business, church, or school.

So when someone breaks a law, the court system he/she ends up in is dependent on the law that's been broken. If it's a state or local law, he/she will enter the state system; if it's a national law, then it's the federal court system.

Each of California's 58 counties - including Sacramento, Placer, Yolo, and El Dorado locally - has its own superior court, which is where people are charged with violation of state and local laws, and trials are held. This is where we find deputy district attorneys, defense lawyers, judges, and juries. Above the superior court system are state appellate courts that, as the name suggests, hear appeals from people who believe they have been wrongly convicted of a crime. This level has only panels of judges who look over court documents, hear arguments from lawyers, and then issue a ruling. Finally, above the state appellate courts is the California Supreme Court, which is the final arbiter, or decider, of appeals within the California judicial system.

Continue reading "Which Court Goes With Which Crime? - State v. Federal, Superior v. Appellate v. Supreme" »

Drug courts developed nationwide in the 1990s in response to that decade's dramatic rise in the number of arrests for possession of methamphetamine, cocaine, ecstacy (or extacy), marijuana, or other illegal substances. Drug courts - used throughout California, including locally in Sacramento, Yolo, Placer, and El Dorado Counties - bring together judges, prosecuting attorneys, defense lawyers, treatment professionals, and probation officers to create a comprehensive program that provides the support and incentives needed to help drug users get clean and lead productive, fulfilling lives.

Drug courts work this way: If you're arrested for straight possession of drugs for personal use (nothing involving sale of drugs or violence) and have no felony convictions of any kind for the previous five years, you qualify for participation in drug court. According to California Penal Code 1000, you would enter a plea of guilty to the charges against you, and the court would issue a "deferred entry of judgment." You would then agree to participate in a comprehensive program that could include individual counseling, group sessions, drug testing, and other treatments. Upon completion of the program, the drug possession charges would be dismissed.

A study by the State of California's Administrative Office of the Courts showed that drug courts are good for defendants and society as a whole. During the period studied (1998 and 1999), drug court graduates had a recidivism rate of 17%, compared to 29% for defendants who participated in drug court but didn't complete the program, and 41% for defendants who did not participate at all. This obviously means more lives back on track, free from the negative consequences of drug use.

Moreover, though drug court requires increased expenditures for probation and treatment, counties with drug courts end up with significantly lower overall costs because of lower recidivism (fewer arrests, court dates, jail/prison/probation time) and lower costs for crime related to drug use. In fact, the study claimed that each successful graduate of drug court in 1998 and 1999 resulted in $11,000 of net savings to the court system and society. The overall savings for California's law enforcement, probation departments, social service agencies, and judicial system were estimated in 2000 to be $90 million.

Continue reading "Drug Courts Prove Beneficial for Defendants, Society, and Budgets" »

As a follow up to our August 28 post on nationwide efforts to reduce the incidence of drunk driving, we note that the Elk Grove Citizen is reporting increased DUI patrols and checkpoints by the Elk Grove Police Department on the weekends leading up to Labor Day and over the Labor Day weekend itself. This effort is part of "Avoid the Capital," an ongoing program supported by law enforcement agencies from throughout the Sacramento region to prevent drunk driving and arrest those people who do drink and drive.

The number of DUI arrests decreased in Elk Grove from 365 in 2007 to 305 in 2008. Elk Grove police attribute the decline to effective education programs, increased patrols during times when drunk drivers are more prevalent, and improved training to help officers spot drunk drivers.

For information on the increase in the number of women charged with DUIs, see our August 15 post. For tips on how to keep yourself and others safe and avoid breaking DUI laws, see our post from August 18.

"DUI Crackdown Intensifies in Elk Grove," September 3, 2009, Elk Gove Citizen
CaliforniaAvoid.org

As the California State Legislature wrestles with the possibility of paroling thousands of inmates from California prisons, a new study shows that in neighborhoods lacking a social network of long-time residents and active community organizations, crime tends to increase as the number of parolees rises. However, those neighborhoods with a strong social support system appear to do a much better job of bringing former prisoners back into society, and thus experience little if any increase in crime.

Because of the over $25 billion state budget deficit, the California Assembly and Senate are proposing cutting the state's prison population, which increased 73% between 1990 and 2006, three times faster than the California adult population. The Senate's plan is more sweeping than the Assembly's, but both would grant early parole to thousands of prisoners.

Coincidentally, University of California, Irvine, professor John Hipp has just published a paper in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology examining the impact of increases in parolees on the neighborhoods they move to after release from prison. His study, which looked at data for Sacramento neighborhoods between 2003 and 2006, showed that as parolees moved in, incidences of burglary, robbery, and assault often went up. When parolees with violent backgrounds moved in, murder rates went up as well.

What was significant though was Hipp's finding that this tendency toward increases in crime were moderated significantly in neighborhoods with established residents and community organizations that helped parolees reintegrate into society. A stronger social fabric seems to boost parolees' chances for success.

At a time when government and non-profit organizations are cutting services because of lack of funding, the legislature's plan to reduce prison population through increased paroles raises concerns for communities in light of Hipp's findings. Given that there will be continued pressure to reduce, or at least not increase, the state's prison population in coming years, communities need to find ways to strengthen programs that help former prisoners become contributing, law abiding citizens.

"Parolees' release leads to crime," UC Irvine, September 1, 2009
"California's Changing Prison Population," Public Policy Institute of California, August 2006