Southern California Criminal Defense Attorney Blog

In a bizarre and surreal series of events, the actions of a former Los Angeles Police Department Officer have stunned the world and has the citizens of Southern California on edge. This story is familiar to most of us by now although we only woke up to this story yesterday morning.

Former LAPD Officer Christopher Jordan Dorner is accused in the murders of a couple in Irvine and charged with the murder of a Riverside Police Officer. He has further been charged with attempted murder for the wounding at least two other officers, causing massive property damage to police vehicles. Additionally, he is suspected of attempted robbery of a boat in San Diego. Dorner, a former United States Navy Officer, posted a lengthy "manifesto", detailing his allegations of his wrongful termination from the LAPD. He has shockingly declared war against the LAPD and all law enforcement.

After allegedly committing the double homicide in Irvine, it appears that Dorner traveled to San Diego and stayed in a Navy hotel facility. From there he allegedly attempted to steal a boat but was thwarted when a rope was caught in the propeller. Authorities believe that he then traveled to the Inland Empire area, shot at a Corona Police Department cruiser and wounded one of the officers. From there he is alleged to have attacked two Riverside Police Department officers in a vehicle, killing one and wounding the other. It was a "cowardly ambush," said Riverside Police Chief Sergio Diaz.

The Los Angeles Police Department, after discovering Dorner's manifesto, sent units to guard other officer's homes named on Dorner's "hit list". It is clear that all law enforcement in Southern California were on a heightened state of alert. Unfortunately, three innocent civilians were mistakenly shot by these police protective units when the vehicles they were traveling in appeared suspicious or matched the description of Dorner's vehicle. One citizen victim, a 71 year old who was delivering newspapers with her daughter, was shot in the back and remains hospitalized.

We are now witnessing an unprecedented manhunt of proportions never seen in recent history. As of this writing, hundreds of law enforcement officers across multiple agencies are scouring the Big Bear Mountain area after Dorner's truck was discovered on fire, with footprints in the snow leading from the vehicle into a forested area. Some news reports have speculated that Dorner may have attempted the San Diego robbery and the burning Big Bear Truck as diversions to law enforcement and that he has a sophisticated plan. Other experts speculate that Dorner is unsophisticated and desperate.

Most, if not all Southern California police agencies are involved in this search and investigation in some way as well as the FBI and other federal agencies. Law Enforcement vehicles are stationed on freeways in the Los Angeles, Orange and San Bernardino Counties as well as into Nevada, where Dorner owns a home. Clearly this manhunt will not end until Dorner is apprehended.

Dorner alludes in his writings that he has no fear of death and indicates that he will not be taken alive. If law enforcement agencies are successful in apprehending him and having him face the legal system, the charges against him will be numerous. The Los Angeles District Attorney's office is conducting its own investigation and is certainly anticipating the preparation of criminal charges if Dorner is taken alive. Among the charges will certainly be Murder, Attempted Murder, special allegations of Murder and Attempted Murder of a Police Officer, gun enhancements, Robbery and Kidnapping as well as pages of other crimes that will certainly carry a request by the prosecution for the death penalty.

Criminal defense attorney David Welch practicing in San Bernardino, Riverside, Orange, Los Angeles and San Diego Counties.

Source: Los Angeles Times Manhunt for Ex-LAPD Officer Christopher Dorner

Despite ongoing objections and legal argument by criminal defense attorneys over Redlands' downtown video surveillance system, the city-implemented system is alive and well. In fact for the first time since its birth in 2006, I have rejoiced over its latest victory.

The event occurred on November 19 outside a bar located in the area of Orange and State Street in Redlands, California. What had begun as a bar brawl between two groups of young men very quickly escalated to shots being fired, two victims alleged to have been injured and one 22-year old man allegedly murdered.

I am not sure if the suspect was aware of the surveillance video system or if so, would he have thought twice before brandishing and then firing multiple shots from a handgun at close range. In a shooting that so often becomes an unsolved crime because no witnesses are willing to come forward and testify to what they saw. However, in this instance, the camera has shown no fear against retaliation and has provided video footage of the shooter and two others thought to be accomplices to the shooter.

At the time the surveillance video was release to local media, Police Chief M. Garcia expressed his confidence that releasing the video would provoke persons with knowledge of the shooting to come forward. He was not wrong, though the police would not release the source that led them to the suspect, within one week, Suspect Randy Ortis was arrested and charged with one count of murder and two counts of attempted murder.

The video should prove to be compelling evidence in meeting the people's burden that the shooting did occur and the defendant is in fact the shooter. However, in viewing he video, Defense may attempt to argue self-defense. The video clearing shows the decedent, Kruze Oevusi Kuaea took the preliminary steps "outside the club" to escalate the tension by walking up to one individual and punching him in the face. The result of the punch caused the then victim of the assault to drop to the ground. Following this, multiple males on supporting their respective peers' position jointed in the fight. It was only at this time, that one man withdrew a pistol and began firing multiple shots at the assault suspect.

Penal Code Section 187(a) describes the charge of Murder as the killing of another human being "With the Malice aforethought". It is the "Malice of forethought" that arguably separates an allegation of Murder from otherwise and allegation of Manslaughter. In the particular instance, since the decedent clearly committed a seemingly unprovoked act of Battery on another, It is not unreasonable to conclude that Mr. Ortis without having more than a few seconds after witnessing the act would not have established aforethought.

This unfortunate incident is not the only effect of the Redlands' video surveillance system. David Welch on many occasions have represented individuals who's acts have been caught be an officer monitoring these bar directed camera systems.

If you have become victimized by surveillance technology and would like the opportunity to further discuss you defenses and legal arguments, Attorney David A. Welch would be very happy to fully review you case and assist you in developing and presenting you best plausible defense.

Daughter of Jon Bon Jovi was arrested for several drug related criminal charges including Possession of a Controlled Substance, Possession of Marijuana, Using Drug Paraphernalia and Unlawful Possession of Marijuana.

The arrest of Ms. Bon Jovi followed the following sequence of events. First, It is reported that Ms. Bon Jovi was found unresponsive (Unconscious) in her college dorm room with a small amount of drugs (presumably Heroin) was found at the scene. Second, a warrant allowing search of the dorm by police resulted in the seizure of heroin, marijuana and drug paraphernalia.

Although it is not clear what Ms. Bon Jovi's exposure to the charges will be in New York where attends school, California has its own standards and laws for dealing with drug crimes. Setting aside the discussion of defense for a moment, In Los Angeles, Ms. Bon Jovi would most certainly be eligible for deferment under PC1000 or Prop 36. If this is Ms. Bon Jovi's first drug related offense, PC1000 would most likely be her best option. Under the PC1000 deferment program, Ms. Bon Jovi would be ordered to attend drug education and counseling meetings for approximately one year. If Ms. Bon Jovi was to stay clean for this one-year period and complete all the terms of the deferment program, the case would be dismissed thus preventing a drug related conviction from ever being placed on her permanent record.

Based on the information made available at this time, It would also appear that Ms. Bon Jovi might have credible defenses to the charges. As a first measure, her attorney will likely look at the proximity the drug was found to the unresponsive body of Ms. Bon Jovi. Certainly it is reasonable to conclude that test were taken which may confirm the presence of drug in her blood stream. However, that can only confirm that Ms. Bon Jovi was under the influence of a controlled substance, in California, a significantly lesser offence than actual possession of a controlled substance.

The second most likely strategy her attorney will employ will be that of questioning the validity of the warrant including the grounds presented to obtain the warrant. Even if the search warrant can be legally supported, the presence of Heroin, Marijuana and drug paraphernalia in a dorm may not be enough for the prosecution to prove that they were in the constructive possession of Ms. Bon Jovi. Questions to ask are, what amounts to the dorm, are we speaking of a building with several rooms which are occupied the students. Are we speaking about a single room within a dorm building. Who shares the dorm with Ms. Bon Jovi or is it a private dorm. Is it reasonable to believe that an person who administered the drug to Ms. Bon Jovi either with or without her consent, panicked after Ms. Bon Jovi became unresponsive and fled, leaving drugs and paraphernalia behind without Ms. Bon Jovi's knowledge.

These potential defenses are some of what would most likely be applied to a similar case in Los Angeles California.
Making a decision to hire an aggressive criminal defense attorney would be the best thing that Mr. Bon Jovi can do for his daughter or that you can do for yourself. David Welch has extensive experience in California Drug Law's and Defense and may have success applying such defenses on your behalf.

The Los Angeles Times reported that comedic actor Fred Willard was arrested at an adult movie theater in Hollywood for LEWD CONDUCT, a lower level sex crime. The Times also reported that Willard tweeted, "Wait til u hear my version; much more PG".

Regardless of his culpability in this offense, he has the opportunity to complete a "diversion" program to avoid a conviction. Diversion programs are common and sometimes available in cases where the offense is considered minor and there is little or no damage caused to the victims. The most common types of crimes eligible for diversion are drug offenses. Even felony drug offenses can be dismissed provided the defendant successfully completes a rehabilitation program. It is certain that the diversion option will be seriously considered by Willard and his attorney. The current climate regarding sex crimes can be harsh.

Should Willard choose the diversion route rather than the risk of losing at trial, there will be no criminal conviction. Willard's attorney also confirmed that Willard is innocent and violated no law.

A Los Angeles City Prosecutor said that Willard had a previous lewd conduct arrest in the 1990's. It is certain that Willard's attorney will do everything possible to avoid that prior from negatively impacting the current case.

The article mentioned that a Los Angeles Police Vice officers arrested the 72-year-old Willard at the Tiki Theater on Santa Monica Boulevard.

While it is beyond belief why an accomplished celebrity would want to even enter an establishment of Tiki's nature in this day and age, he has the absolute right to defend himself from the arresting officer's allegations. Due to the serious nature of any sex crime allegation, an experienced Southern California Criminal Defense Attorney should be retained for even a seemingly minor crime.

The Los Angeles Times and reported that Singer Justin Bieber was stopped and cited for driving in a "reckless manner" on the busy 101 Freeway while driving a Fisker Karma sports car. Witnesses, including Los Angeles City Councilman Dennis Zine, who called 911, indicated that Bieber was being chased by paparazzi. After the call, CHP officers stopped Bieber and cited him for Reckless Driving.

Vehicle Code Section 23103, or "Reckless Driving" is a misdemeanor criminal offense in California that can have serious consequences. Unlike a speeding ticket, which is classified as an "infraction" and would result as just a fine, a conviction for Reckless Driving could carry Probation and significant fines and though unlikely, custody. Additionally, a convictions for wreckless driving will have a significant impact on insurance rates. While an individual such as Bieber may attempt to use a necessity defense for driving recklessly, law enforcement is generally intolerant of this type of crime and are eager to issue citations..

LA Councilman Zine is reported as stated, Bieber had no excuse for his wreckless driving. "Any time you do 90, the paparazzi are going to go 90,".

The Times reported that Zine observed Bieber going from the fast lane to the slow lane to the shoulder in traffic. Zine was quoted as stating that he felt someone was going to crash, so he called 911. Reports indicate that Bieber admitted to driving 80 mph.

Perhaps the worst element pertaining to Bieber's possible defenses is that this high profiled nature of the prosecutions key witness, Councilman Zine, was also the one who contacted 911. It is certain that the Councilman will be subpoenaed to testify at any trial if the matter proceeds that far.

It is also certain that Bieber will retain an attorney. Anyone charged with Reckless Driving certainly should retain the services of an experienced Southern California Criminal Defense Attorney. It is reasonable to assume that his counsel will take the path of a "necessity" defense. Defense counsel would argue that Bieber was justified in breaking the law in order to escape from potential harm. Councilman Zine compared Bieber's case with the Princess Diana chase resulting in her death. Prosecutors would argue, however, that Bieber was never in any physical danger; that the only threat was being photographed. In fact, they would further argue that the potential danger to himself or the public came from his driving and not the paparazzi

Although this misdemeanor is high profile due to the fact that Bieber was driving, it is likely that the matter will be resolved through negotiations with the prosecutor. It is almost certain that Bieber will not be subjected to any actual jail time and an effort will be made to have the 23103 Reckless Driving charge dismissed or significantly reduced. As in Bieber's case, an experienced Criminal Defense Attorney should always be retained.

A 24 year old adult and a 16 year old Juvenile were arrested at the Yermo Agricultural Inspection Station after officials discovered approximately 3,950 pounds of fireworks without necessary permits.

The Desert Dispatch reported that the arrests were part of a crackdown on illegal fireworks. In this campaign, San Bernardino County Fire Department authorities confiscated over 13,000 pounds of fireworks across the High Desert. The two individuals were arrested and charged with felony possession of dangerous fireworks without a permit. The adult was taken to a county jail, while the teen boy was taken to juvenile hall and later released to his parents.

There are several warnings that can be gleaned from this report. One being the legal issues surrounding possession of fireworks, and the other being the difference in how the exact same case will be dealt with by the adult Criminal Court as a felony in the case of the 24 year old, and the Juvenile Court regarding the 16 year old.

As authorities indicated in the press release in this arrest, anyone caught with possessing over 100 pounds of fireworks without a valid permit could face felony criminal charges.
Laws vary regarding fireworks throughout counties and municipalities Some counties, such as Los Angeles and San Diego have outlawed the sale and possession of even "safe and sane" fireworks. Even in San Bernardino County, cities such as Chino allow the sale of fireworks, but the county prohibits use of these fireworks in unincorporated areas. However, regardless of regulations regarding "safe and sane" fireworks, California law prohibits anyone from owning fireworks that move along the ground, shoot in the air or explode.

Regarding the issue of adult court "punishment" vs. Juvenile Court "rehabilitation", it is likely that the two individuals will be dealt with quite differently by the two courts. Although the two can both be considered youth, the mere fact that the 24 year old is over 18 places him in a position where he faces criminal penalties and possibly a felony conviction which will affect him for the rest of his life. On the other hand, the Juvenile Court is focused on rehabilitation of the minor. There are many more opportunities for the minor to avoid serious criminal penalties. Regardless, the juvenile court record will not affect him throughout his adult life.

Finally, many juvenile defendants have been charged as an adult and suffer the same exact consequence as would an adult. To understand your rights and risks, you should contact a qualified and experienced Southern California Criminal Defense Attorney who can lead you or your family member through this always complicated legal system.

The Los Angeles Times reported that a San Bernardino County jury convicted former Westminster police detective Anthony Orban of kidnapping and raping a waitress from the Ontario Mills Mall two years ago.

The disgraced detective was labeled the "Zoloft Rapist" since his defense centered on his claim that he was legally insane since he was under the influence of the prescription medication Zoloft and as such, is not guilty by reason of insanity. The jury rejected the former detective's defense, and as a result he will serve prison time instead of receiving treatment at a mental hospital.

The Times reported that in support of his insanity defense, Orban stated in the trial that he had no memory of the lengthy attack and blamed his use of Zoloft, which he claimed caused hallucinations and suicidal and homicidal fantasies during the period of time the attack occurred.

A key element of an insanity defense is that at the time a crime occurs, the defendant has a mental state that leaves him in a state that where he cannot ascertain right from wrong and as a result is not responsible for the crime. Insanity defenses are extremely difficult unless the defendant can demonstrate clearly that the condition significantly altered the defendant's mental state.

In the Orban case, as expected, prosecution and defense expert witnesses disagreed as to whether Orban was legally insane. While the psychiatrist for the defense stated that the defendant had a psychotic break and as a result was not fully aware of his actions. The clinical psychologist who testified for the prosecution testified that the mental lapse was caused more by alcohol than by Zoloft. This was supported by evidence that on the day of the attack, Orban and a friend had consumed eight margaritas and two pitchers of beer between them.

The prosecution expert testified that Orban "understood the nature and quality of his acts and could distinguish between right and wrong."

The victim, a waitress, testified in the trial that Orban kidnapped her while she walked in the Ontario Mills parking lot and forced her to drive to Fontana where according to the victim Orban brutally raped and tormented her. When Orban was distracted by a cell phone call, she escaped by jumping out of the car and running to safety at a nearby liquor store. Police recovered Orban's gun, with his name on it, from the victim's car.

The insanity defense is a very difficult strategy that is most often rejected by juries as occurred in this case. However, keeping in mind that every case is different and needs to be treated as such, It is important that you consult with a qualified Southern California Criminal Defense Attorney that can help you determine if an Insanity Defense it ideal for you.

The Los Angeles times reported that a Los Angeles man was charged by prosecutors with stealing approximately 3,000 movie posters from bus shelters and selling them online. He was charged with felony grand theft together with an allegation that the value of the property taken exceeded $200,000. He used an online auction site and sold them for more than $450,000. The case recently settled with the man pleading no contest to one count of Grand Theft in the Van Nuys court.

The times reported that the defendant allegedly stole the movie posters, including posters for the popular movie "The Hunger Games" from June 2011 until March of 2012. After receiving a tip, Los Angeles Police detectives went online to purchase one of the posters. Investigators then searched the defendant's home, finding numerous stolen posters. Interestingly, the posters had a stamp "not for resale" on the back.

After entering the plea, the defendant was sentenced to 25 days in county jail, three years of formal probation and a two-year suspended prison sentence. If the defendant violates any of his probation terms, the prison sentence would be imposed.

While the defendant avoided state prison and only has minimal jail time, he is shacked with a felony theft conviction, which will most likely preclude him from employment opportunities. Assuming this is the best possible outcome for this defendant's case, he should consider speaking with a Southern California Criminal Defense Attorney regarding reducing his conviction to a misdemeanor and having the case expunged from his records.

Theft crimes must be vigorously defended, as the consequences can be severe. An experienced Southern California Criminal Defense Attorney will thoroughly investigate the matter and work towards the most positive outcome.

The Los Angeles Times reports that a retired Los Angeles Police Department detective has been arrested on the Big Island of Hawaii for the fatal beating death of his wife six years ago.

The Times reports goes on to say that former homicide detective Dan DeJarnette, 59, had initially been booked at the time of the slaying on suspicion of murder, but a lack of evidence prevented charges from being filed.

The former detective stated at the time of his wife's 2006 death that he had found her lying on a lava embankment about 20 feet from the couple's home on the southern end of the island. She was pronounced dead at a hospital. Although DeJarnette told patrol officers that his wife was hurt in an accident, an autopsy found that she had actually died from head trauma.

As with many such "cold cases", law enforcement reopened the case in January of this year. Additional investigation apparently revealed new DNA evidence linking DeJarnette with the murder which lead to his being arrested without incident. He is being held in lieu of $200,000 bail.

Even though this suspect was a seasoned detective who was obviously familiar with the criminal investigation process, understood the consequences of being involved with such a violent crime and making statements to investigators. Despite his experience and knowledge of police investigations, of it is apparent that, if guilty,

Having seen the extremely serious consequences involving the punishment of those involved in violent crimes, it is critical to take any steps possible to avoid being involved in volatile situations, whether they be domestic or otherwise.

Should a situation or case escalate to the point where law enforcement become involved, it is extremely important to retain the services of a qualified Southern California Criminal Defense Attorney. It is also recommended to protect one's constitutional rights, including the right to remain silent.

Los Angeles Times:

Most Domestic Violence arrests involve spouses or domestic partners involved in disputes. Although rare, occasionally a Domestic Violence arrest is made in a situation where other family members are involved in an alleged altercation. The New York Daily News reported that Michael Madsen, a film actor known for his roles in violent films was arrested last week for fighting with his son. Michael Madsen was taken into custody by the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department officers after accusations of domestic violence were leveled against him. Madsen, who starred in Reservoir Dogs and Kill Bill, was allegedly involved in an altercation with his teenage son at his home in Malibu, California. Officers allege that when they arrived at Madsen's home, they found Madsen drunk and acting violently towards his own son. Authorities further alleged that his son received several scrapes and bruises but was not seriously injured and did not require medical attention. Madsen was subsequently arrested on charges of felony Child Endangerment and was later released on bond.
The altercation allegedly began when actor became enraged when he found his son smoking marijuana. Madsen apparently became angry when his son refused to relinquish the pot to him. The tragedy for this, as well as most other Domestic Violence cases, is that they involve legitimate private disputes between family members. While occasionally arguments become physical, also common is for false allegations to be made by an alleged victim. Regardless of the truth of an allegation, the accused is arrested, subjected to criminal prosecution in addition to the collateral effects such as a tarnished reputation.
Police officers have the duty to protect the public and will make arrests if they determine that the allegations are credible. That standard is different from the standard for conviction, which is "proof beyond a reasonable doubt". Critical after an arrest is to obtain the services of an experienced Southern California Criminal Defense Attorney to thoroughly investigate and defend against the charges. Often facts become apparent that were unknown or overlooked by police that can be significant factors in either reducing charges or having them dismissed.

Source:

In a Los Angeles Domestic Violence case, the Huffington Post reported that the eldest son of Playboy founder Hugh Hefner allegedly assaulted the 2011 Playboy Playmate of the Year. In conjunction with the criminal allegations, she also filed against him a Restraining Order in the Los Angeles Court. According to the report, 21 year old Hefner allegedly punched and kicked the 20 year old Playmate, leaving "red marks" on her body. Hefner was arrested and later released on $20,000 bail. The report further indicates that the Playmate stated that she is willing to "drop the charges" against the younger Hefner if he apologizes to her.

In California, a victim cannot simply "drop the charges" against a domestic violence assailant, as at that point the prosecution holds that power. In recent years, the law has changed to not allow victims to hold authority as to whether a case proceeds forward or not. The rationale is that often a Domestic Violence perpetrator holds some type of power over the victim, such as a head of household being the sole income source for the family. In the past, alleged victims would recant their statements to police, fearing that they would lose the family breadwinner. In the past, victims would drop charges and prosecutors therefore could not proceed.

The Huffington Post reports that in the Hefner case, law enforcement representatives confirmed that despite the victim's intent, that they don't need her help to press charges against Hefner.

A Southern California Criminal Defense Attorney, while understanding that the Playmate does not hold the power over whether a case proceeds, should she fail to cooperate in the case prosecution could be much more difficult. Domestic Violence cases are taken very seriously by law enforcement and prosecution. In most Domestic Violence calls, law enforcement will make an arrest if believable allegations are made by an accuser. Surprising to most is that the accuser does not need to be injured or show evidence of an attack. As a result, it sometimes is that case that alleged victims will contact law enforcement in order to retaliate against the accused, even if the allegations are false.

The tragedy for those arrested for domestic violence, even when evidence is either weak or non-existent, is that those accused are subjected to having to defend themselves in court. Prosecutors often will side with police reports and accuser's statements. It is critical at that point that a competent Southern California Criminal Defense Attorney be retained. It is important that a thorough investigation be conducted to uncover any problems or inconsistencies with the accuser's version of events. A Domestic Violence conviction can have numerous negative effects, including the loss of some constitutional rights as well as embarrassment, potential loss of employment in addition to incarceration and/or other penalties.

Restraining Orders almost always accompany Domestic Violence cases, as with the Hefner case. Again, whether or not the allegations have merit, Restraining Orders can be easily obtained. The frightening reality is that if a Restraining Order is granted, an individual can be prevented from returning to their own home! It again is important to obtain the services of an experienced Criminal Defense Attorney to defend against the allegations
.
The stakes in a Domestic Violence/Restraining Order case such as the Hefner matter are high and should not be taken lightly.

Continue reading "Hefner Bound By Restraining Order Filed by 2011 Playboy Playmate of the Year" »

January 29, 2012. The Los Angeles Times reports that a law enforcement officer under investigation for sexual misconduct with a teenager was shot and killed by fellow officers while he was on duty. The officers were attempting to arrest him Saturday as they tried to arrest him in Santa Maria, a city north of Los Angeles, authorities said.

This very unusual and unprecedented tragedy shocked law enforcement as well as the community. It was necessary for officers to shoot in self defense after the suspect officer first discharged his weapon.

Officers were sent to make a felony arrest, but the officer resisted arrest (a violation of Penal Code Section 148(a)(1)) and struggled when they arrived. He allegedly first physically resisted, then fired his gun without striking anyone. After the suspect officer fired his weapon, he was then shot in the chest. He was declared dead after emergency surgery at Marian Medical Center, Santa Maria police Chief Danny Macagni said in a statement. Under California Penal Code Seciton 197, This act on the part of the Los Angeles Police arresting officers amounted to Justifiable Homicide.

It was reported that the suspect officer was a four year Santa Maria Police Department veteran. The department learned of an internal investigation of an alleged sexual relationship with a 17 year old girl (Presumably a violation alleging Unlawful Sexual Intercourse with a Person Under 18 pursuant to Penal Code 261.5) and it became necessary to arrest him immediately, Macagni said. It was reported that authorities intended on filing multiple felony charges after the arrest.

While the specific nature of the sex crime was not disclosed, reportedly investigators had evidence "that demanded that we go out and take this officer off the street immediately." It was reported that detectives had begun investigating the alleged relationship, and minutes before the shooting had confirmed that an "inappropriate" and "very explicit" relationship had developed, the police chief said.

"The information that we had in hand demanded that we not let him leave that scene, get in a car, drive somewhere, it would put the public at risk," Macagni said at the news conference. "We just did not know what was going to happen, we did not expect him to react the way that he did."

Supervising officers were sent to make a felony arrest, but he struggled with them when they arrived, first putting up a physical fight, then firing his gun but hitting no one, Macagni said.

Had the suspect officer been successfully arrested, it is likely that in addition to various sex crime charges, he would have been charged with assault with a deadly weapon and resisting arrest and possibly other violent crime charges.

Reference:
Police officer shot, killed by fellow officer in Santa Maria

Continue reading "Southern California Police Officer Shot and Killed by Fellow Officer" »

In a tragic San Diego County Juvenile Court murder and felony assault case, a 10 year old boy accused of stabbing a 12 year old friend to death will be evaluated to determine whether he is competent to stand trial within the juvenile court system.

A 10 year old boy in San Diego has been accused of stabbing his 12-year-old friend to death with a knife after the older boy attempted to break up a fight on January 16, 2012. The 10-year-old is being charged as a juvenile with murder and felony assault. While it is common for prosecutors to charge those under 18 as adults, under California law defendants must be at least 14 years old before they can be charged as adults. In this case, the 10 year old has been charged with murder in Juvenile Court.

An important issue in this case as well as any case involving a child under the age of 14 is whether the child has the capacity to understand the consequences of his actions and whether the child had the capacity to intentionally commit the crime. The 10 year old's attorney was in court on January 19th with his attorney to address the issue of whether he is capable of knowingly committing the crimes, and therefore legally competent to stand trial.

As a Southern California criminal defense attorney who frequently defends clients within California's juvenile court system, I continue to follow this and other cases so that I may stay abreast of all the latest changes in court rules and defense strategies.

According to the Los Angeles Times, San Diego Deputy District Attorney Victor Barr indicated that "This is a tragic, tragic case for everyone involved."

The 10 year old is believed to have emotional issues, which could bolster arguments that he is legally incompetent to stand trial. Also according to the Los Angeles Times, the boy appeared restless in court, and a bailiff standing close behind him instructed him to sit up straight after he slumped his head on his arm. The Times indicated that he seemed confused when the judge asked him to agree to appear at the next court hearing February 23, 2012. The boy is currently being held at the Kearny Mesa Juvenile Detention Facility, where he is complying with all the rules according to the Director of Institutional Services for the San Diego County probation department.

Neighbors told the press that although the 10 year old suffered from emotional issues, they were shocked that he could be capable of violence. The slain 12 year old victim's mother indicated that the 10 year old is "not some monster" and in effect, people should not judge him prematurely. "Please don't make it out that he was this terrible human being," she told reporters.

If the court finds that he is competent, the boy will be held for trial and, if convicted, could be held in juvenile detention until he is 25 years of age.

Los Angeles Times, "10-year-old accused of killing friend to undergo tests," Rich Marosi, Jan. 19, 2012

Prosecutors have charged San Francisco's newly sworn-in sheriff deputy with misdemeanor domestic violence charges related to an incident with his wife on New Year's Eve. It appears that even those in law enforcement are not above being confronted with this type of charge.

According to sources, the new chief of his department, Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi, entered not guilty pleas to charges of domestic violence, child endangerment and dissuading a witness.

The allegations are that Sheriff Mirkarimi grabbed and bruised Eliana Lopez's arm during a heated argument at their home. The report of the injury was video recorded by a neighbor. Text messages from victim Lopez to the neighbor also detailed the events. Like many accused of domestic violence, Mirkarimi has denied the allegations. Also as is the case in many domestic violence cases, alleged victim Lopez is now defending her husband in a written statement, saying the episode was "completely taken out of context."

As should be the case with anyone accused of a crime, the Sheriff retained a criminal defense attorney to defend him against the charges which both he and the alleged victim now indicate are not warranted.

Mirkarimi was sworn in as San Francisco Sheriff Deputy only days after the alleged incident and appeared at his swearing in ceremony with his wife and son. When the Sheriff was asked about the incident, he called it "a private matter, a family matter."

In a court hearing on Thursday, January 19, 2012, Mirkarimi, through his attorney, entered a not guilty pleas. As is typical in Domestic Violence cases, the judge ordered Sheriff Mirkarimi to have no contact with his wife and child. While his attorney expressed disappointment in that ruling, courts will often issue stay away orders from alleged victims. Often, these orders can be modified from a stay away order to an order that the accused have no negative contact with the alleged victim.

If convicted of the misdemeanor charges, Mirkarimi would have to give up his department-issued firearm and possibly be subjected to searches as conditions of probation. Another standard effect of having a conviction for Domestic Violence is a mandatory loss of any privilege to own firearms. Should he convicted, Mirkarimi would make be the only elected sheriff in the state forbidden from carrying a gun.

California Sheriff Deputy Charged with Domestic Violence.

Continue reading "California Sheriff Deputy Faces Misdemeanor Charges in Dispute" »

New facts have arisen in the bizarre case of LA arson suspect Harry Burkhart and his mother, Dorothee Burkhart. The 24-year-old Burkhart terrified the city of Los Angeles and became an infamous figure after he was arrested in dozens of Hollywood arsons that left multiple torched buildings and vehicles and caused millions of dollars in damage. The suspected arsonist appears to have gone on an arson spree in response to his perception that his mother was being wrongfully deported by United States immigration officials.

Dorothee Burkhart's case, however, is not merely a simple deportation case: The federal complaint against her describes a lengthy list of fraud accusations from Germany. Investigations have uncovered not only the Los Angeles arson allegations, but also arsons in Germany and possibly Canada. Berkhart is suspected of starting the fire in Germany at a house belonging to his family. There are also allegations that Dorothee Burkhart escaped from police custody through a German hospital window when her handcuffs were removed so she could use restroom facilities. She frequently blamed others for her troubles and claimed that fascists were trying to kill her and her son.

Arson suspect Burkhart's anti-American outburst at a recent detention hearing for his mother was noted by a deputy U.S. Marshal, who recognized Burkhart after police began circulating a video showing the man wanted in the arsons.

Regarding Dorothee Burkhart, records of her legal troubles date back over ten years starting from her renting apartments in Germany but not returning security deposits. She continued in that fraudulent behavior several years later and also didn't pay about $10,000 for a 2004 breast surgery according to German authorities.

It appears that this mother-son team moved from one country to the next staying, until now, one step ahead of the law.

Arson is considered an extremely serious crime, especially in this case given the significant damage and potential for causing death and injury. Los Angeles and Southern California prosecutors vigorously prosecute defendants accused of arson, especially considering the potential or actual threat to life and property often involved in arson cases,

California law prohibits the willful and malicious setting of fire to the property of another as well as criminalizing recklessly setting fire to the property of another. If an individual is accused of setting fire to his own property, he or she can only be convicted if the purpose was fraudulent, as in the case of attempting to collect insurance proceeds, or if the fire injures another person or his or her property.

While Arson specifically deals with the setting of fire to another's property, if a death should occur or an intent to cause death, an individual can be charged with murder or attempted murder.

Continue reading "California Law and a Recent Los Angeles Arson Case" »