Oh, the creative mind. How we love rappers and poets who channel their inner angst into poetry and lyrics for us to hum along with or sing along with them. But, what happens when inner demons exposed in a song mirror reality?
If song lyrics explicitly identify the proposed victim of a crime so that the lyrics can be found to contain a criminal threat, the artist can be charged with this crime, according to Second District Court of Appeal, Division Six, (which is here in Los Angeles), in People v. Murillo (2015)__ Cal.App. 4th __, ("Murillo"), Case No. B257429, decided on July 22, 2015. In Murillo, the Court of Appeal found that alleged threats were made in the lyrics of a so-called "rap song" distributed on the internet. The song's lyrics lamented a friend’s incarceration and referred to the victims of his friend’s crime by their first and last names, describing them as "hoe[s]," among other profanities, and describing proposed retribution for their "snitching."
These lyrics state: "[T]hese bitches caught him slippin [¶] Then they fuckin snitchin [¶] . . . I'm fucking all these bitches [¶] Hunting down all these snitches [¶] . . . Shit you know we have no fear [¶] I'll have your head just like a dear [¶] It will be hanging on my wall [¶] . . . I said go and get the Feds [¶] Cuz your gonna to end up dead [¶] You're going be laying on that bed [¶] Cuz im coming for your head bitch."
Murillo posted a Twitter message regarding pressure that he had received from the high-school dean to remove the song because it contained threats. Murillo referred to the dean as "dumb ass," and stated "805 hoes on blast lol." Later, one of the identified girls in the song, saw a link to Murillo's new song on her Facebook newsfeed. She opened the link and listened to the song several times before she understood it. She was shocked and frightened by the song's lyrics and also by the comments posted by others. The girl informed her mother, who then contacted law enforcement and Murillo was arrested for two counts of making a criminal threat to a crime victim in violation of Penal Code section 140, subdivision (a), one charge for each girl.
At Murillo’s preliminary hearing, the magistrate noted that publishing the victims' names "speaks to the purpose behind [Murillo's] intent." But the magistrate explained that "the rap song is closer to protected speech than non-protected speech." and discharged the felony complaint and declined to hold Murillo to answer for the charges. The state appealed and sought to reinstate the charges.
The Court of Appeal agreed with the state and ordered that the charges be reinstated.
Penal Code Section 140, subdivision (a), makes it a crime to threaten a crime victim with violence. Subdivision (a), provides in relevant part: "[E]very person who willfully uses force or threatens to use force or violence upon . . . a victim of[] a crime . . . because the . . . victim . . . has provided any assistance or information to a law enforcement officer, or to a public prosecutor in a criminal proceeding . . . , shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year, or by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 for two, three, or four years."
The state asserted that Murillo's song lyrics were a serious expression of his intent to commit acts of violence against both girl victims of his friend’s crime. Section 140 only requires a general intent, not specific intent to intimidate the victim, Also, section 140 does not require that the threat be communicated to the victim.
The court of Appeal found that a reasonable listener could have understood "Moment for Life Remix" to constitute a true threat to Jane Does 1 and 2; that is, the song could be understood to convey a serious expression of intent to commit an act of unlawful violence against the girls. The court focused on the lyrics stating, "you're gonna end up dead," and "I'm coming for your head, bitch." The court also pointed out that Murillo had used the girl’s actual names and repeatedly used the phrase "fuck snitches." Therefore, the Court ruled that for purposes of the preliminary examination, this evidence provides sufficient cause to believe Murillo is guilty of the charged offenses and as a matter of law, the magistrate's legal conclusion otherwise is in error.
copyright © 2015 Christine Esser
The information contained here is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for legal counsel. Online readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Information on this blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship between you and Christine Esser. An attorney- client relationship is only established when a written retainer has been signed.
Friday, July 31, 2015
Wednesday, July 29, 2015
Juvenile Offenses Qualify for Prop 47 Reclassification from Felony to Misdemeanor
The District Attorney in San Diego County had contended that Proposition 47 reclassification from a felony to a misdemeanor did not apply to juvenile offenses because a "conviction" was required and juvenile offenders received a disposition, not a conviction. A new test case out of San Diego, where the trial court agreed with the District Attorney’s Office and did not reclassify the juvenile offender’s theft crime to a misdemeanor, put this argument to rest.
In that case, the juvenile sought a writ of mandate in the court of appeal. In Alexandro N. v. Superior Court (2015, __Cal.App.4th __, the Fourth District held that the offense reclassification provisions set forth in section 1170.18 apply to juveniles. Additionally, the court found that unless there was another reason to hold the juvenile’s DNA, his DNA sample and information must be removed from the state's data base.
Thus, this court case makes it clear that all those old juvenile cases qualify for reclassification under Proposition 47. If you or someone you know, had a juvenile case that involved one of the prior felonies that have been reclassified to a misdemeanor under Proposition 47, seek re-sentencing now.
On my Google plus web page, you can find, "Where to find help for Prop 47 re-sentencing in Los Angeles County, which lists organizations in Los Angeles that will provide free help if you qualify for their services. Also, you can look at June's "How to apply for Prop 47 in California to reduce a felony to a misdemeanor without a lawyer" at lametrocriminaldefense.blogspot.com for more information if you would like to prepare and file the Proposition 47 Petition yourself.
copyright © 2015 Christine Esser
The information contained here is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for legal counsel. Online readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Information on this blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship between you and Christine Esser. An attorney-client relationship is only established when a written retainer has been signed.
In that case, the juvenile sought a writ of mandate in the court of appeal. In Alexandro N. v. Superior Court (2015, __Cal.App.4th __, the Fourth District held that the offense reclassification provisions set forth in section 1170.18 apply to juveniles. Additionally, the court found that unless there was another reason to hold the juvenile’s DNA, his DNA sample and information must be removed from the state's data base.
Thus, this court case makes it clear that all those old juvenile cases qualify for reclassification under Proposition 47. If you or someone you know, had a juvenile case that involved one of the prior felonies that have been reclassified to a misdemeanor under Proposition 47, seek re-sentencing now.
On my Google plus web page, you can find, "Where to find help for Prop 47 re-sentencing in Los Angeles County, which lists organizations in Los Angeles that will provide free help if you qualify for their services. Also, you can look at June's "How to apply for Prop 47 in California to reduce a felony to a misdemeanor without a lawyer" at lametrocriminaldefense.blogspot.com for more information if you would like to prepare and file the Proposition 47 Petition yourself.
copyright © 2015 Christine Esser
The information contained here is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for legal counsel. Online readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Information on this blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship between you and Christine Esser. An attorney-client relationship is only established when a written retainer has been signed.
Monday, July 13, 2015
How to Fight a Driving With a Suspended License [DUI] Ticket: CA Vehicle Code 14601.2
If your driver’s license is revoked or suspended in California for DUI under Vehicle Code section 23152 or 23153, and you get caught driving, you will probably receive a ticket for a violation of Vehicle Code section 14601.2 (or 14601.5)
Therefore, if you aren’t certain if your license was suspended for a DUI, you can check with the Department of Motor Vehicles by calling 1-800-777-0133, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., stating driver’s license and following the prompts. If you find out that your California Driver’s license is suspended, don’t drive. Find another method to travel: use public transportation, Uber, hire a driver, call a cab, call a friend, or use a bicycle, but don’t drive a vehicle on a public street or highway.
Vehicle Code 14601.2, subdivision (a), states that a person shall not drive a motor vehicle when that person's driving privilege is suspended or revoked for a conviction of a violation of Section 23152 or 23153 if the person so driving has knowledge of the suspension or revocation.
But knowledge of a suspension, revocation, or restriction of the driving privilege is conclusively presumed if notice has been given by the department to a driver under Section 13106. (See, Section 14601.2(c).) This presumption affects the burden of proof.
Section 13106, subdivision (a), indicates that when a person’s driving privilege is suspended
or revoked, the DMV shall notify the person by first-class mail of the action taken and of the effective date of the suspension, except for those persons who have been personally given notice by the DMV or a court, or by a peace officer, or otherwise. It is a rebuttable presumption, affecting the burden of proof, that a person has knowledge of the suspension or revocation if notice has been sent by first-class mail to the most recent address reported to the DMV, and the notice has not been returned to the DMV as undeliverable or unclaimed.
But if you didn’t know your license was suspended, and you received a ticket for driving with a suspended license due to a DUI charge, it is a defense if you can rebut the presumption that you had knowledge of the suspension. But since knowledge will be presumed if the notice sent out by the DMV has not been returned to them as undeliverable or unclaimed, this is often difficult to establish.
Much may depend on the timing. Sometimes a person is ticketed before the notice of suspension arrives at their door. Or, sometimes the person moves and the DMV notice of suspension never reaches them. Also, as you will read further below, the punishment often depends on the timing of convictions, so it may be in your best interest to allow your attorney to continue a case to avoid having a conviction fall within a 5-year, 7-year , or 10-year period of a prior conviction.
There could also be additional ways that a competent criminal defense attorney can challenge this charge; therefore, it is strongly recommended that you find an experienced criminal defense lawyer or ask for the services of the Public Defender if you cannot afford a lawyer. This is a misdemeanor offense which means that a court can impose a jail sentence of not more than six months.
The penalty for violating Vehicle Code section 14601.2 is as follows:
Upon a first conviction, by imprisonment in the county jail for not less than 10 days or more than six months and by a fine of not less than three hundred dollars ($300) or more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), unless the person has been designated a habitual traffic offender. (Veh. Code, § 14601.2, subd.(d)(1).)
If the offense occurred within five years of a prior offense that resulted in a conviction of a violation of this section or Section 14601, 14601.1, or 14601.5, by imprisonment in the county jail for not less than 30 days or more than one year and by a fine of not less than five hundred dollars ($500) or more than two thousand dollars ($2,000), unless the person has been designated a habitual traffic offender.
If a person is convicted of a second or subsequent offense that results in a conviction of this section within seven years, but over five years, of a prior offense that resulted in a conviction of a violation of this section or Section 14601, 14601.1, or 14601.5 and is granted probation, the court shall impose as a condition of probation that the person be confined in the county jail for at least 10 days.
But, the penalties increase if a person is designated as a habitual offender. Any person convicted of being an habitual traffic offender is punished as follows:
(1) Upon a first conviction, by imprisonment in the county jail for 30 days and by a fine of one thousand dollars ($1,000).
(2) Upon a second or any subsequent offense within seven years of a prior conviction under this section, by imprisonment in the county jail for 180 days and by a fine of two thousand dollars ($2,000).
Beginning October 15, 2015, California will offer traffic ticket amnesty for certain vehicle code violations, including this one.
If you are in the Los Angeles metro area, and you would like a recommendation for an experienced criminal defense lawyer, you can contact me at esserlaw@gmail.com
.
copyright © 2015 Christine Esser
The information contained here is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for legal counsel. Online readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Information on this blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship between you and Christine Esser. An attorney-client relationship is only established when a written retainer has been signed.
Therefore, if you aren’t certain if your license was suspended for a DUI, you can check with the Department of Motor Vehicles by calling 1-800-777-0133, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., stating driver’s license and following the prompts. If you find out that your California Driver’s license is suspended, don’t drive. Find another method to travel: use public transportation, Uber, hire a driver, call a cab, call a friend, or use a bicycle, but don’t drive a vehicle on a public street or highway.
Vehicle Code 14601.2, subdivision (a), states that a person shall not drive a motor vehicle when that person's driving privilege is suspended or revoked for a conviction of a violation of Section 23152 or 23153 if the person so driving has knowledge of the suspension or revocation.
But knowledge of a suspension, revocation, or restriction of the driving privilege is conclusively presumed if notice has been given by the department to a driver under Section 13106. (See, Section 14601.2(c).) This presumption affects the burden of proof.
Section 13106, subdivision (a), indicates that when a person’s driving privilege is suspended
or revoked, the DMV shall notify the person by first-class mail of the action taken and of the effective date of the suspension, except for those persons who have been personally given notice by the DMV or a court, or by a peace officer, or otherwise. It is a rebuttable presumption, affecting the burden of proof, that a person has knowledge of the suspension or revocation if notice has been sent by first-class mail to the most recent address reported to the DMV, and the notice has not been returned to the DMV as undeliverable or unclaimed.
But if you didn’t know your license was suspended, and you received a ticket for driving with a suspended license due to a DUI charge, it is a defense if you can rebut the presumption that you had knowledge of the suspension. But since knowledge will be presumed if the notice sent out by the DMV has not been returned to them as undeliverable or unclaimed, this is often difficult to establish.
Much may depend on the timing. Sometimes a person is ticketed before the notice of suspension arrives at their door. Or, sometimes the person moves and the DMV notice of suspension never reaches them. Also, as you will read further below, the punishment often depends on the timing of convictions, so it may be in your best interest to allow your attorney to continue a case to avoid having a conviction fall within a 5-year, 7-year , or 10-year period of a prior conviction.
There could also be additional ways that a competent criminal defense attorney can challenge this charge; therefore, it is strongly recommended that you find an experienced criminal defense lawyer or ask for the services of the Public Defender if you cannot afford a lawyer. This is a misdemeanor offense which means that a court can impose a jail sentence of not more than six months.
The penalty for violating Vehicle Code section 14601.2 is as follows:
Upon a first conviction, by imprisonment in the county jail for not less than 10 days or more than six months and by a fine of not less than three hundred dollars ($300) or more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), unless the person has been designated a habitual traffic offender. (Veh. Code, § 14601.2, subd.(d)(1).)
If the offense occurred within five years of a prior offense that resulted in a conviction of a violation of this section or Section 14601, 14601.1, or 14601.5, by imprisonment in the county jail for not less than 30 days or more than one year and by a fine of not less than five hundred dollars ($500) or more than two thousand dollars ($2,000), unless the person has been designated a habitual traffic offender.
If a person is convicted of a second or subsequent offense that results in a conviction of this section within seven years, but over five years, of a prior offense that resulted in a conviction of a violation of this section or Section 14601, 14601.1, or 14601.5 and is granted probation, the court shall impose as a condition of probation that the person be confined in the county jail for at least 10 days.
But, the penalties increase if a person is designated as a habitual offender. Any person convicted of being an habitual traffic offender is punished as follows:
(1) Upon a first conviction, by imprisonment in the county jail for 30 days and by a fine of one thousand dollars ($1,000).
(2) Upon a second or any subsequent offense within seven years of a prior conviction under this section, by imprisonment in the county jail for 180 days and by a fine of two thousand dollars ($2,000).
Beginning October 15, 2015, California will offer traffic ticket amnesty for certain vehicle code violations, including this one.
If you are in the Los Angeles metro area, and you would like a recommendation for an experienced criminal defense lawyer, you can contact me at esserlaw@gmail.com
.
copyright © 2015 Christine Esser
The information contained here is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for legal counsel. Online readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Information on this blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship between you and Christine Esser. An attorney-client relationship is only established when a written retainer has been signed.
Saturday, July 11, 2015
How to get a DNA sample and profile removed from the CAL-DNA Data Bank.
A person who is eligible to have a DNA sample and profile destroyed can make the request directly to the CAL-DNA databank or file a motion in court for a court order that orders this material to be destroyed. California Penal Code Section 299 sets forth the criteria for who is elible to have DNA stored at the Database destroyed.
Penal Code section 299, subdivision (a), allows a person whose DNA profile has bee included in the state’s data bank to request that these materials be expunged (removed) when the underlying conviction or disposition serving as the basis for including the DNA profile has been reversed and the case dismissed, the defendant has been found factually innocent of the underlying offense pursuant to Section 851.8, the defendant has been found not guilty, or the defendant has been acquitted of the underlying offense.
The court issuing the reversal, dismissal, or acquittal shall order the expungement and shall send a copy of that order to the Department of Justice DNA Laboratory Director. Upon receipt of the court order, the Department of Justice shall expunge all identifiable information in the data bank and any criminal identification records pertaining to the person.
Penal Code section 299, subdivision (b)(1), allows a person whose DNA profile has been included in a data bank to make a written request to expunge information and materials from the data bank. The person requesting the data bank entry to be expunged must send a copy of his or her request to the trial court that entered the conviction or rendered disposition in the case, to the DNA Laboratory of the Department of Justice, and to the prosecuting attorney of the county in which he or she was convicted, with proof of service on all parties. The court has the discretion to grant or deny the request for expungement. The denial of a request for expungement is an nonappealable order and is not reviewed by a petition for a writ.
Penal Code section 299, subdivision (c), directs the Department of Justice to destroy the specimen or sample collected from the person and any criminal identification records pertaining to the person, unless the department determines that the person has otherwise become obligated
to submit a blood specimen as a result of a separate conviction, juvenile adjudication, or finding of guilty or not guilty by reason of insanity for an offense described in subdivision (a) of Section
296, or as a condition of a plea.
But the Department of Justice is not required to destroy an autoradiograph or other item obtained from a blood specimen if evidence relating to another person subject to the provisions of this
chapter would thereby be destroyed.
Thus, you can make a request that these records be destroyed directly to the state’s databank or make a written request for a court order that the records be destroyed to the trial court. To qualify, you must provide sufficient documentation of identity, legal status and criminal history to the California Department of Justice, DNA Database Program (CAL-DNA).
If CAL-DNA receives sufficient documentation showing that an individual meets the criteria for expungement of his or her DNA sample, CAL-DNA will review and research the request and issue a response to the petitioner indicating that the expungement was completed and the sample destroyed, or notify the petitioner of the legal reason the Department is required to retain the sample and profile.
If all of the documentation is provided or readily available, expungements using this expedited procedure are generally completed within 2 to 4 weeks.
The state reports that to date, over 96% of expungement requests have resulted in expungement, removal, or, in a small number of those cases, confirmation that no buccal sample had been submitted under the name provided. Denials are based on statutory requirements, generally because the offender has another qualifying offense.
You can mail a request for DNA DATABASE sample expungement to:
California Department of Justice
CAL-DNA Data Bank Program
Attn: Expungement Requests
1001 W. Cutting Blvd., Suite 110
Richmond, CA 94804
NOTE: If a DNA database sample expungement request is denied, a person may still initiate a court proceeding by completing, filing, and serving the California Judicial Council form, pdf on the CAL-DNA Program and the District Attorney's Office of the County where the DNA sample was collected.
If this procedure appears too complicated, you can contact an attorney to write the letter or make the motion in court to have the DNA evidence destroyed. If you are in the Los Angeles metro area, and you would like a recommendation for an experienced criminal defense attorney, you can contact me at esserlaw@gmail.com .
copyright © 2015 Christine Esser
The information contained here is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for legal counsel. Online readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Information on this blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship between you and Christine Esser. An attorney-client relationship is only established when a written retainer has been signed.
Penal Code section 299, subdivision (a), allows a person whose DNA profile has bee included in the state’s data bank to request that these materials be expunged (removed) when the underlying conviction or disposition serving as the basis for including the DNA profile has been reversed and the case dismissed, the defendant has been found factually innocent of the underlying offense pursuant to Section 851.8, the defendant has been found not guilty, or the defendant has been acquitted of the underlying offense.
The court issuing the reversal, dismissal, or acquittal shall order the expungement and shall send a copy of that order to the Department of Justice DNA Laboratory Director. Upon receipt of the court order, the Department of Justice shall expunge all identifiable information in the data bank and any criminal identification records pertaining to the person.
Penal Code section 299, subdivision (b)(1), allows a person whose DNA profile has been included in a data bank to make a written request to expunge information and materials from the data bank. The person requesting the data bank entry to be expunged must send a copy of his or her request to the trial court that entered the conviction or rendered disposition in the case, to the DNA Laboratory of the Department of Justice, and to the prosecuting attorney of the county in which he or she was convicted, with proof of service on all parties. The court has the discretion to grant or deny the request for expungement. The denial of a request for expungement is an nonappealable order and is not reviewed by a petition for a writ.
Penal Code section 299, subdivision (c), directs the Department of Justice to destroy the specimen or sample collected from the person and any criminal identification records pertaining to the person, unless the department determines that the person has otherwise become obligated
to submit a blood specimen as a result of a separate conviction, juvenile adjudication, or finding of guilty or not guilty by reason of insanity for an offense described in subdivision (a) of Section
296, or as a condition of a plea.
But the Department of Justice is not required to destroy an autoradiograph or other item obtained from a blood specimen if evidence relating to another person subject to the provisions of this
chapter would thereby be destroyed.
Thus, you can make a request that these records be destroyed directly to the state’s databank or make a written request for a court order that the records be destroyed to the trial court. To qualify, you must provide sufficient documentation of identity, legal status and criminal history to the California Department of Justice, DNA Database Program (CAL-DNA).
If CAL-DNA receives sufficient documentation showing that an individual meets the criteria for expungement of his or her DNA sample, CAL-DNA will review and research the request and issue a response to the petitioner indicating that the expungement was completed and the sample destroyed, or notify the petitioner of the legal reason the Department is required to retain the sample and profile.
If all of the documentation is provided or readily available, expungements using this expedited procedure are generally completed within 2 to 4 weeks.
The state reports that to date, over 96% of expungement requests have resulted in expungement, removal, or, in a small number of those cases, confirmation that no buccal sample had been submitted under the name provided. Denials are based on statutory requirements, generally because the offender has another qualifying offense.
You can mail a request for DNA DATABASE sample expungement to:
California Department of Justice
CAL-DNA Data Bank Program
Attn: Expungement Requests
1001 W. Cutting Blvd., Suite 110
Richmond, CA 94804
NOTE: If a DNA database sample expungement request is denied, a person may still initiate a court proceeding by completing, filing, and serving the California Judicial Council form, pdf on the CAL-DNA Program and the District Attorney's Office of the County where the DNA sample was collected.
If this procedure appears too complicated, you can contact an attorney to write the letter or make the motion in court to have the DNA evidence destroyed. If you are in the Los Angeles metro area, and you would like a recommendation for an experienced criminal defense attorney, you can contact me at esserlaw@gmail.com .
copyright © 2015 Christine Esser
The information contained here is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for legal counsel. Online readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Information on this blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship between you and Christine Esser. An attorney-client relationship is only established when a written retainer has been signed.
Friday, July 10, 2015
Combat Veterans or Military Members Accused of a California Crime May Be Eligible to Get Case Dismissed
If you are a combat Veteran accused of a crime in California, you should know that California Penal Code section 1170.9 may allow a court to dismiss your case and order treatment instead of the probation or prison sentence that would ordinarily be imposed if certain conditions are met.
To be eligible for probation and a later dismissal under Section 1170.9, the accused must allege that "he or she committed the offense as a result of sexual trauma, traumatic brain injury, post-traumatic stress disorder, substance abuse, or mental health problems stemming from service in the United States military, the court shall, prior to sentencing, make a determination as to whether the defendant was, or currently is, a member of the United States military and whether the defendant may be suffering from sexual trauma, traumatic brain injury, post-traumatic stress disorder, substance abuse, or mental health problems as a result of his or her service. "(Pen. Code, § 1179.9, subd.(a).)
"It is in the interests of justice to restore a defendant who acquired a criminal record due to a mental health disorder stemming from service in the United States military to the community of law abiding citizens.(Pen. Code, , § 1170.9, subd. (h) (1))
Usually the defendant enters a plea to a charge that is eligible for probation and enters into a treatment program approved by the court. Later, the defendant’s criminal defense lawyer requests a hearing, giving at least 15 days notice to the prosecution where defendant’s performance on probation is evaluated. At the hearing, the court can take several different types of actions, including:
* Deem all conditions of probation to be satisfied, including
fines, fees, assessment, and programs, and terminate probation prior
to the expiration of the term of probation. But this does not apply to
court-ordered victim restitution.
* Reduce an eligible felony to a misdemeanor.
* Grant relief under Section 1203.4. (California’s expungement statute.)
* The Court may seal the records so the general public would need a court order to see them.
But, even if the action is dismissed under 1203.4, the defendant's DNA sample and profile in the DNA data bank will not be removed and the defendant’s gun rights will not be restored. Also, this section will not affect any actions that the Department of Motor Vehicles may take, if any.
If you are a Combat veteran or military member in the Los Angeles metro area, and you would like me to recommend an experienced criminal defense lawyer to represent you, you can contact me at esserlaw@gmail.com
If you are reading this and have a question about a general issue related to criminal defense that is not specific to your case, please let me know. If I know the answer or if I can research the topic, I'll discuss the issue here. Thank you.
copyright © 2015 Christine Esser
The information contained here is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for legal counsel. Online readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Information on this blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship between you and Christine Esser. An attorney-client relationship is only established when a written retainer has been signed.
To be eligible for probation and a later dismissal under Section 1170.9, the accused must allege that "he or she committed the offense as a result of sexual trauma, traumatic brain injury, post-traumatic stress disorder, substance abuse, or mental health problems stemming from service in the United States military, the court shall, prior to sentencing, make a determination as to whether the defendant was, or currently is, a member of the United States military and whether the defendant may be suffering from sexual trauma, traumatic brain injury, post-traumatic stress disorder, substance abuse, or mental health problems as a result of his or her service. "(Pen. Code, § 1179.9, subd.(a).)
"It is in the interests of justice to restore a defendant who acquired a criminal record due to a mental health disorder stemming from service in the United States military to the community of law abiding citizens.(Pen. Code, , § 1170.9, subd. (h) (1))
Usually the defendant enters a plea to a charge that is eligible for probation and enters into a treatment program approved by the court. Later, the defendant’s criminal defense lawyer requests a hearing, giving at least 15 days notice to the prosecution where defendant’s performance on probation is evaluated. At the hearing, the court can take several different types of actions, including:
* Deem all conditions of probation to be satisfied, including
fines, fees, assessment, and programs, and terminate probation prior
to the expiration of the term of probation. But this does not apply to
court-ordered victim restitution.
* Reduce an eligible felony to a misdemeanor.
* Grant relief under Section 1203.4. (California’s expungement statute.)
* The Court may seal the records so the general public would need a court order to see them.
But, even if the action is dismissed under 1203.4, the defendant's DNA sample and profile in the DNA data bank will not be removed and the defendant’s gun rights will not be restored. Also, this section will not affect any actions that the Department of Motor Vehicles may take, if any.
If you are a Combat veteran or military member in the Los Angeles metro area, and you would like me to recommend an experienced criminal defense lawyer to represent you, you can contact me at esserlaw@gmail.com
If you are reading this and have a question about a general issue related to criminal defense that is not specific to your case, please let me know. If I know the answer or if I can research the topic, I'll discuss the issue here. Thank you.
copyright © 2015 Christine Esser
The information contained here is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for legal counsel. Online readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Information on this blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship between you and Christine Esser. An attorney-client relationship is only established when a written retainer has been signed.
Monday, July 6, 2015
Don’t Post Nude Pictures of Your Ex Online in California
After a bad breakup things can get nasty and feelings are often hurt. But think twice before you post any nude pictures of your ex online. If you post a picture of your ex online that reveals an intimate body part and your ex is identifiable in the picture or if the picture shows your ex engaged in a sexual act, and your ex believed the image would remain private, and can claim that you should know distribution of this image would cause distress, you can be arrested for what is commonly referred to as "revenge porn" in California.
Penal Code section 647, subdivision (j) (4) (A), states, "Any person who intentionally distributes the image of the intimate body part or parts of another identifiable person, or an image of the person depicted engaged in an act of sexual intercourse, sodomy, oral copulation, sexual penetration, or an image of masturbation by the person depicted or in which the person depicted participates, under circumstances in which the persons agree or understand that the image shall remain private, the person distributing the image knows or should know that distribution of the image will cause serious emotional distress, and the person depicted suffers that distress.
Section 647, subdivision 647, subdivision (j) (4) (B) explains that a "person intentionally distributes an image described in subparagraph (A) when he or she personally distributes the image, or arranges, specifically requests, or intentionally causes another person to distribute that image."
Section 647, subdivision (C), defines "intimate body part" [as] any portion of the genitals, the anus and in the case of a female, also includes any portion of the breasts below the top of the areola, that is either uncovered or clearly visible through clothing.
Penalties
This is a misdemeanor with a penalty of up to six months in jail and a $1,000 fine.
If you are viewing this warning too late, and your arrest occurred in the Los Angeles metro area, and you would like a recommendation for an experienced criminal defense attorney, you can contact me at esserlaw@gmail.com .
copyright © 2015 Christine Esser
The information contained here is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for legal counsel. Online readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Information on this blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship between you and Christine Esser. An attorney-client relationship is only established when a written retainer has been signed.
Penal Code section 647, subdivision (j) (4) (A), states, "Any person who intentionally distributes the image of the intimate body part or parts of another identifiable person, or an image of the person depicted engaged in an act of sexual intercourse, sodomy, oral copulation, sexual penetration, or an image of masturbation by the person depicted or in which the person depicted participates, under circumstances in which the persons agree or understand that the image shall remain private, the person distributing the image knows or should know that distribution of the image will cause serious emotional distress, and the person depicted suffers that distress.
Section 647, subdivision 647, subdivision (j) (4) (B) explains that a "person intentionally distributes an image described in subparagraph (A) when he or she personally distributes the image, or arranges, specifically requests, or intentionally causes another person to distribute that image."
Section 647, subdivision (C), defines "intimate body part" [as] any portion of the genitals, the anus and in the case of a female, also includes any portion of the breasts below the top of the areola, that is either uncovered or clearly visible through clothing.
Penalties
This is a misdemeanor with a penalty of up to six months in jail and a $1,000 fine.
If you are viewing this warning too late, and your arrest occurred in the Los Angeles metro area, and you would like a recommendation for an experienced criminal defense attorney, you can contact me at esserlaw@gmail.com .
copyright © 2015 Christine Esser
The information contained here is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for legal counsel. Online readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Information on this blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship between you and Christine Esser. An attorney-client relationship is only established when a written retainer has been signed.
Sunday, July 5, 2015
Arrested for DUI in California at a Checkpoint?
Here are two important issues that an experienced criminal defense attorney will evaluate on a DUI checkpoint case:
1. Was the Checkpoint Legal?
In the landmark case of Ingersoll v. Palmer (1987) 43 Cal.3d 1321, the California Supreme Court identified some factors to be used to determine this issue:
(a) Supervisors, not field officers, implemented the checkpoint
First, the decision to establish a sobriety checkpoint, the selection of the site and the procedures for the checkpoint operation should be made and established by supervisory law enforcement personnel, and not by an officer in the field. (Id. at pp. 1341-1342.) This requirement is important to reduce the potential for arbitrary and capricious enforcement.
(b) Neutral selection criteria was used
Second, the discretion of field officers was limited by a neutral formula for which drivers were being stopped. For example, a neutral formula could include every driver or every third, fifth or tenth driver.
(c ) Maintenance of safety conditions
Primary consideration must be given to maintaining safety for motorists and officers. Proper lighting, warning signs and signals, and clearly identifiable official vehicles and personnel are necessary to minimize the risk of danger to motorists and police. (Id. at pp. 1342-43.)
(d). Reasonable location
The location of checkpoints should be determined by policy-making officials rather than by officers in the field. The sites chosen should be those which will be most effective in achieving the governmental interest; i.e., on roads having a high incidence of alcohol related accidents and/or arrests. (Ibid.)
(e) Time and duration of stop must be reasonable.
The time of day that a checkpoint is established and how long it lasts also bear on its intrusiveness as well as its effectiveness. The Supreme Court notes that a nighttime stop may be more hazardous and possibly more frightening to motorists, but it will also probably prove more effective. Thus, the court provides no hard and fast rules, but instead states that law enforcement officials will be expected to exercise good judgment in setting times and durations, with an eye to effectiveness of the operation, and with the safety of motorists a coordinate consideration. (Ibid.)
(f) Well lit signs must provide motorists with notice of the roadblock
The roadblock should be established with high visibility, including warning signs, flashing lights, adequate lighting, police vehicles and the presence of uniformed officers. Not only are such factors important for safety reasons, advance warning will reassure motorists that the stop is duly authorized. (Ibid.)
(g) Length and nature of detention must be minimized
The Supreme Court advises that each motorist stopped should be detained only long enough for the officer to question the driver briefly and to look for signs of intoxication, such as alcohol on the breath, slurred speech, and glassy or bloodshot eyes. If the driver does not display signs of impairment, he or she should be permitted to drive on without further delay. If the officer does observe symptoms of impairment, the driver may be directed to a separate area for a roadside sobriety test. At that point, the Supreme Court states that further investigation should be based on probable cause, and general principles of detention and arrest would apply. (Ibid.)
(h) The roadblock should be publicly advertised in advance.
Advance publicity is important to the maintenance of a constitutionally permissible sobriety checkpoint. Publicity both reduces the intrusiveness of the stop and increases the deterrent effect of the roadblock.
2. Was There Probable Cause to Believe the Motorist’s Driving Was Impaired?
Even if the DUI Checkpoint was valid, for an arrest at a DUI checkpoint to be valid, only drivers who are exhibiting signs of impairment may be detained at the secondary screening area. See Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz (1990) 496 U.S. 444 and Ingersol v. Palmer, supra, 43 Cal.3d 1321. Therefore, even if a driver acknowledges having had a drink or two, and his or her breath smells of an alcoholic beverage, but the officer does not detect any sign of impairment in the manner of driving or other physical manifestations, such as red and watery eyes, slurred speech, lack of motor control, then a court could find that the officer lacked probable cause to detain the motorist at the secondary screening area.
If you or your friend or relative was arrested in the Los Angeles metro area for DUI at a checkpoint, and would like me to recommend an experienced criminal defense attorney, you can contact me at esserlaw@gmail.com .
copyright © 2015 Christine Esser
The information contained here is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for legal counsel. Online readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Information on this blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship between you and Christine Esser. An attorney- client relationship is only established when a written retainer has been signed
1. Was the Checkpoint Legal?
In the landmark case of Ingersoll v. Palmer (1987) 43 Cal.3d 1321, the California Supreme Court identified some factors to be used to determine this issue:
(a) Supervisors, not field officers, implemented the checkpoint
First, the decision to establish a sobriety checkpoint, the selection of the site and the procedures for the checkpoint operation should be made and established by supervisory law enforcement personnel, and not by an officer in the field. (Id. at pp. 1341-1342.) This requirement is important to reduce the potential for arbitrary and capricious enforcement.
(b) Neutral selection criteria was used
Second, the discretion of field officers was limited by a neutral formula for which drivers were being stopped. For example, a neutral formula could include every driver or every third, fifth or tenth driver.
(c ) Maintenance of safety conditions
Primary consideration must be given to maintaining safety for motorists and officers. Proper lighting, warning signs and signals, and clearly identifiable official vehicles and personnel are necessary to minimize the risk of danger to motorists and police. (Id. at pp. 1342-43.)
(d). Reasonable location
The location of checkpoints should be determined by policy-making officials rather than by officers in the field. The sites chosen should be those which will be most effective in achieving the governmental interest; i.e., on roads having a high incidence of alcohol related accidents and/or arrests. (Ibid.)
(e) Time and duration of stop must be reasonable.
The time of day that a checkpoint is established and how long it lasts also bear on its intrusiveness as well as its effectiveness. The Supreme Court notes that a nighttime stop may be more hazardous and possibly more frightening to motorists, but it will also probably prove more effective. Thus, the court provides no hard and fast rules, but instead states that law enforcement officials will be expected to exercise good judgment in setting times and durations, with an eye to effectiveness of the operation, and with the safety of motorists a coordinate consideration. (Ibid.)
(f) Well lit signs must provide motorists with notice of the roadblock
The roadblock should be established with high visibility, including warning signs, flashing lights, adequate lighting, police vehicles and the presence of uniformed officers. Not only are such factors important for safety reasons, advance warning will reassure motorists that the stop is duly authorized. (Ibid.)
(g) Length and nature of detention must be minimized
The Supreme Court advises that each motorist stopped should be detained only long enough for the officer to question the driver briefly and to look for signs of intoxication, such as alcohol on the breath, slurred speech, and glassy or bloodshot eyes. If the driver does not display signs of impairment, he or she should be permitted to drive on without further delay. If the officer does observe symptoms of impairment, the driver may be directed to a separate area for a roadside sobriety test. At that point, the Supreme Court states that further investigation should be based on probable cause, and general principles of detention and arrest would apply. (Ibid.)
(h) The roadblock should be publicly advertised in advance.
Advance publicity is important to the maintenance of a constitutionally permissible sobriety checkpoint. Publicity both reduces the intrusiveness of the stop and increases the deterrent effect of the roadblock.
2. Was There Probable Cause to Believe the Motorist’s Driving Was Impaired?
Even if the DUI Checkpoint was valid, for an arrest at a DUI checkpoint to be valid, only drivers who are exhibiting signs of impairment may be detained at the secondary screening area. See Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz (1990) 496 U.S. 444 and Ingersol v. Palmer, supra, 43 Cal.3d 1321. Therefore, even if a driver acknowledges having had a drink or two, and his or her breath smells of an alcoholic beverage, but the officer does not detect any sign of impairment in the manner of driving or other physical manifestations, such as red and watery eyes, slurred speech, lack of motor control, then a court could find that the officer lacked probable cause to detain the motorist at the secondary screening area.
If you or your friend or relative was arrested in the Los Angeles metro area for DUI at a checkpoint, and would like me to recommend an experienced criminal defense attorney, you can contact me at esserlaw@gmail.com .
copyright © 2015 Christine Esser
The information contained here is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for legal counsel. Online readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Information on this blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship between you and Christine Esser. An attorney- client relationship is only established when a written retainer has been signed
Friday, July 3, 2015
You Can Be Arrested for a California DUI Without Drinking Any Alcohol this 4th of July
Many people believe that the DUI laws apply only to drinking an alcoholic beverage, but this is not true in California. Vehicle Code section 23152 defines the types of actions that can lead to a conviction. Vehicle Code section 23152, subdivision (e) provides,"It is unlawful for a person who is under the influence of any drug to drive a vehicle." Additionally, Section 23152, subdivision (f) provides, "It is unlawful for a person who is under the combined influence of any alcoholic beverage and drug to drive a vehicle." These statutes do not limit the drugs to unlawful drugs; thus, use of a prescription drug could lead to a DUI arrest even though the person did not drink a single alcoholic beverage.
Therefore, prudent drivers should take some precautions this weekend while partying to prevent ending up in jail for a DUI arrest. According to Hutton and Wilson, premiere DUI attorneys in the Los Angeles area, here are some of the factors officers will be looking for to spot drunk or drug-impaired drivers:
• erratic driving
• excessive speed
• weaving between lanes
• entering the freeway in the exit lane
• straddling the center line, or drifting within your lane
• making too-wide turns
• driving too slow
• waiting too long to accelerate at a stop light when the light turns green
• not following traffic signs and signals
• stopping on a street or highway for no reason
• making unlawful turns
• no headlights on at night
• driving on the wrong side of the road
Thus, making certain you have a designated driver who will not be drinking any alcohol and who has not taken any prescription drugs or other unlawful drugs that could impair driving can prevent a DUI arrest. Additionally, simply not driving on the roads this weekend will prevent a DUI arrest as well.
But, if prevention does not work, you will need to hire an experienced criminal defense attorney to fight these charges in court and take action to preserve your driving privilege with the DMV.
If you have a case in the Los Angeles metro area, and would like me to recommend an experienced criminal defense attorney, you can contact me at esserlaw@gmail.com .
copyright © 2015 Christine Esser
The information contained here is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for legal counsel. Online readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Information on this blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship between you and Christine Esser. An attorney- client relationship is only established when a written retainer has been signed
Therefore, prudent drivers should take some precautions this weekend while partying to prevent ending up in jail for a DUI arrest. According to Hutton and Wilson, premiere DUI attorneys in the Los Angeles area, here are some of the factors officers will be looking for to spot drunk or drug-impaired drivers:
• erratic driving
• excessive speed
• weaving between lanes
• entering the freeway in the exit lane
• straddling the center line, or drifting within your lane
• making too-wide turns
• driving too slow
• waiting too long to accelerate at a stop light when the light turns green
• not following traffic signs and signals
• stopping on a street or highway for no reason
• making unlawful turns
• no headlights on at night
• driving on the wrong side of the road
Thus, making certain you have a designated driver who will not be drinking any alcohol and who has not taken any prescription drugs or other unlawful drugs that could impair driving can prevent a DUI arrest. Additionally, simply not driving on the roads this weekend will prevent a DUI arrest as well.
But, if prevention does not work, you will need to hire an experienced criminal defense attorney to fight these charges in court and take action to preserve your driving privilege with the DMV.
If you have a case in the Los Angeles metro area, and would like me to recommend an experienced criminal defense attorney, you can contact me at esserlaw@gmail.com .
copyright © 2015 Christine Esser
The information contained here is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for legal counsel. Online readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Information on this blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship between you and Christine Esser. An attorney- client relationship is only established when a written retainer has been signed
Thursday, July 2, 2015
Party for 4th of July, but Know the Rules of the Road Before You Drive.
Not only will drivers be arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol ("DUI") this weekend, but many drivers , and even passengers, who have not been drinking will be arrested for DUI-related crimes for acts they may not have known are illegal in California.
Here are some reminders to prevent an unwanted arrest this weekend:
(1) Even if you are not under the influence of alcohol, you cannot drink any alcoholic beverage while driving a motor vehicle upon any highway or on specific lands for off-road vehicles.
(2) You cannot drive a vehicle on any highway or on specific lands for off-road vehicles with an open container of an alcoholic beverage in the passenger compartment, so place any opened bottles of alcohol you are transporting in your trunk.
(3) Even your passenger cannot drink an alcoholic beverage or hold an open alcoholic beverage while you drive on a highway.
(4) Drivers under 21 cannot knowingly drive a vehicle that contains alcoholic beverages unless accompanied by an adult who is 21 or older.
(5) Passengers in a vehicle who are under 21 years of age cannot possess any alcoholic beverage unless accompanied by an adult 21 years of age or older.
If you did not read this until it was too late and you pick up a DUI-related charge, or even a DUI and you want me to recommend an experienced criminal defense attorney to fight your case, you can contact me at esserlaw@gmail.com.
copyright © 2015 Christine Esser
The information contained here is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for legal counsel. Online readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Information on this blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship between you and Christine Esser. An attorney- client relationship is only established when a written retainer has been signed
Here are some reminders to prevent an unwanted arrest this weekend:
(1) Even if you are not under the influence of alcohol, you cannot drink any alcoholic beverage while driving a motor vehicle upon any highway or on specific lands for off-road vehicles.
(2) You cannot drive a vehicle on any highway or on specific lands for off-road vehicles with an open container of an alcoholic beverage in the passenger compartment, so place any opened bottles of alcohol you are transporting in your trunk.
(3) Even your passenger cannot drink an alcoholic beverage or hold an open alcoholic beverage while you drive on a highway.
(4) Drivers under 21 cannot knowingly drive a vehicle that contains alcoholic beverages unless accompanied by an adult who is 21 or older.
(5) Passengers in a vehicle who are under 21 years of age cannot possess any alcoholic beverage unless accompanied by an adult 21 years of age or older.
If you did not read this until it was too late and you pick up a DUI-related charge, or even a DUI and you want me to recommend an experienced criminal defense attorney to fight your case, you can contact me at esserlaw@gmail.com.
copyright © 2015 Christine Esser
The information contained here is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for legal counsel. Online readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Information on this blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship between you and Christine Esser. An attorney- client relationship is only established when a written retainer has been signed
Wednesday, July 1, 2015
Are You the Parent of a College-Bound Teen with a California Juvenile Court Record?
Along with helping your teenager prepare for the SAT test, there is another step you can take to help your child be admitted to the college of his or her choice. If you have not already taken steps to seal your child's California juvenile court records, this should be done as soon as possible. Leaving these records unsealed can prevent college admission and some drug offenses can prevent a student from receiving federal financial aid. But these problems can often be prevented.
According to the Center for Community Alternatives, a majority (66%) of the colleges that responded to questions acknowledged that they collect criminal justice information from prospective students seeking admission, although not all of them consider this information in their admissions process. This group also found that private schools and four-year schools are more likely to collect and use this information than public and two-year colleges and universities.
Furthermore, prospective college applicants should know that all students who apply for federal financial aid are asked about whether they have any prior drug conviction, misdemeanor or felony, and if they do, they are not eligible to receive financial aid from the federal government.
That is why all college-bound students who have a juvenile record and have turned 18 years old, or five years have passed since a juvenile disposition occurred, should find out if they are eligible to have their juvenile court records sealed. Once the juvenile court records are sealed, the young person is no longer required to report the conviction on most applications. (See Welf. & Inst. Code, § 781, subd.(a).)
If the student does not first seek to have prior juvenile court records sealed before applying to colleges and universities, it is possible that a prior criminal record could prevent admission to higher education or cause the young person to be placed on probation if admitted. Also, as indicated above, if any misdemeanor or felony drug offense is discovered on a student’s criminal record, all federal financial aid will be denied. This includes loans and grants.
Young people who want to have juvenile court records sealed can contact an experienced criminal defense attorney in their local area. Also, some California Public Defender offices perform this service free of charge. Anyone seeking more information on this topic should visit the California Supreme Court’s website under Sealing Juvenile Records. http://www.courts.ca.gov/selfhelp-delinquency.htmThis site lists where young people can go to obtain help to seal their records for free or at a reduced cost.
If you have a case in the Los Angeles metro area, and would like me to recommend an experienced criminal defense attorney to get a juvenile court record sealed, you can contact me at esserlaw@gmail.com .
copyright © 2015 Christine Esser
The information contained here is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for legal counsel. Online readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Information on this blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship between you and Christine Esser. An attorney- client relationship is only established when a written retainer has been signed
According to the Center for Community Alternatives, a majority (66%) of the colleges that responded to questions acknowledged that they collect criminal justice information from prospective students seeking admission, although not all of them consider this information in their admissions process. This group also found that private schools and four-year schools are more likely to collect and use this information than public and two-year colleges and universities.
Furthermore, prospective college applicants should know that all students who apply for federal financial aid are asked about whether they have any prior drug conviction, misdemeanor or felony, and if they do, they are not eligible to receive financial aid from the federal government.
That is why all college-bound students who have a juvenile record and have turned 18 years old, or five years have passed since a juvenile disposition occurred, should find out if they are eligible to have their juvenile court records sealed. Once the juvenile court records are sealed, the young person is no longer required to report the conviction on most applications. (See Welf. & Inst. Code, § 781, subd.(a).)
If the student does not first seek to have prior juvenile court records sealed before applying to colleges and universities, it is possible that a prior criminal record could prevent admission to higher education or cause the young person to be placed on probation if admitted. Also, as indicated above, if any misdemeanor or felony drug offense is discovered on a student’s criminal record, all federal financial aid will be denied. This includes loans and grants.
Young people who want to have juvenile court records sealed can contact an experienced criminal defense attorney in their local area. Also, some California Public Defender offices perform this service free of charge. Anyone seeking more information on this topic should visit the California Supreme Court’s website under Sealing Juvenile Records. http://www.courts.ca.gov/selfhelp-delinquency.htmThis site lists where young people can go to obtain help to seal their records for free or at a reduced cost.
If you have a case in the Los Angeles metro area, and would like me to recommend an experienced criminal defense attorney to get a juvenile court record sealed, you can contact me at esserlaw@gmail.com .
copyright © 2015 Christine Esser
The information contained here is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for legal counsel. Online readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Information on this blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship between you and Christine Esser. An attorney- client relationship is only established when a written retainer has been signed
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)