Probation Violations

Posted by Chris Morales on Wed, Dec 16, 2015 @ 12:00 PM
Read More

Tags: jail, felony, violation, sentence, Fines, restitution, attorney, criminal, crime, probation

Vehicular Manslaughter: Sentencing, Laws and Penalties

Posted by Chris Morales on Mon, Dec 14, 2015 @ 09:40 AM

What is Vehicular Manslaughter?

Drivers who unintentionally cause accidents that result in the deaths of passengers, occupants of other cars, or pedestrians may find themselves charged with the crime of vehicular manslaughter (also known as vehicular homicide). Vehicular manslaughter charges are appropriate when the driver was under the influence of drugs or alcohol, or driving recklessly (or merely carelessly), or otherwise driving in an illegal manner—each state specifies the circumstances that will support charging this crime. 

The crime of vehicular manslaughter is a relative newcomer to the list of homicide offenses. Before its appearance, these drivers were charged with manslaughter (unintentionally killing someone as a result of criminal negligence or recklessness). But juries were often reluctant to attach the onus of “manslaughter” to a traffic accident. “Vehicular manslaughter” addressed this reluctance by typically providing for lesser penalties than manslaughter itself.

Driving that Results in Vehicular Manslaughter Charges

In order to know whether a vehicular manslaughter charge is appropriate when a highway death results from an accident, you’ll need to know exactly what kind of driving will trigger such a charge in your state. Here are the typical types of driving that state laws provide for.

Negligent driving

In many states, ordinary negligence, or carelessness, on the part of the driver will support a vehicular manslaughter charge. Ordinary negligence is inattention, or driving that lacks the care and prudence that an ordinarily careful person would exercise under the circumstances. For example, a driver who only briefly takes his eyes off of the road while reaching into his car’s console can still be charged with vehicular manslaughter if his inattention results in a fatal accident.

“Criminal negligence,” “culpable or gross negligence,” “reckless disregard of others’ safety”

In other states, the type of driving necessary to support a charge of vehicular manslaughter must be more egregious than simple negligence, explained above. Criminal, culpable, or gross negligence; and reckless disregard of others’ safety are common benchmarks. For example, someone who drove at high speed with a high blood alcohol level, failed to heed flashing red lights, traveled on the other side of the road, and failed to apply the brakes is someone whose driving was beyond careless or negligent.

Driving while intoxicated

Showing that a driver was intoxicated or under the influence of alcohol or drugs is a common way that prosecutors prove negligent or (depending on the state) reckless behavior. Intoxication can be proved by eyewitness testimony, self-incriminating statements, and chemical evidence, including blood, breath, or urine tests. In most states, prosecutors must show that the driving itself was careless—in other words, mere proof of legal intoxication is insufficient. Florida, however, is a notable exception—in that state, the prosecutor need only show that the defendant’s driving caused a death, and that the driver was intoxicated. (Fl. Stat. Section 860.01.)

Defendants who have a blood alcohol level of 0.08 or higher are presumed to be driving under the influence (some states set lower thresholds for certain classes of drivers, such as underage drivers and drivers of commercial vehicles). But even if the reading is lower, prosecutors can meet the applicable negligence standard by providing evidence of the driving itself, in conjunction with the ingestion of drugs or alcohol.

Drivers who are under the influence of prescribed drugs may also be charged with vehicular manslaughter when their driving causes a highway death. Consider the driver who takes medicine after being warned by the doctor of its side effects, when the medicine container itself contained clear and obvious warnings not to drive, and when the driver had prior experience with the drug’s effects—this driver has acted negligently at least, and possibly even recklessly.

Violating a safety or other statute

Vehicular manslaughter can also be charged when accidents happen after drivers violate a safety statute. For instance, many states require windshields to be clear. When a death results from the driver’s inability to see through an obscured windshield, a manslaughter charge may follow. Passing vehicles in violation of “no passing” signs, driving beyond the posted speed limit, and performing illegal U-turns are similar examples.

States also single out specific violations of law that are not necessarily safety violations, but involve important interests. When a death results, vehicular manslaughter charges might result. Under Iowa law, for example, a sober driver who causes a death while passing a stopped school bus commits a felony, while deaths caused by other types of reckless driving not involving DUI are punished as misdemeanors. Other states punish as felonies deaths caused by drivers attempting to elude police.

Driving while sleepy or falling asleep

Many traffic accidents happen when drivers have fallen asleep at the wheel, or are extremely drowsy. But when someone dies as a result, the driver won’t necessarily face vehicular manslaughter charges. The question is whether the driver acted negligently (or recklessly, depending on the state’s standard) when getting behind the wheel in such a condition. For instance, a manslaughter charge might be appropriate when someone chooses to stay up all night, works all day, and attempts to drive home after being awake for more than 36 hours. Voluntarily putting oneself in a position so that one cannot stay awake, and then driving, is negligent behavior and possibly even recklessness.

What About the Other Driver?

It’s very common for each driver involved in a car accident to share some of the responsibility—perhaps one car was going too fast, but the other car was, too. When blame and damages are sorted out in a civil context—who pays for what—courts often apportion the blame using the theory of “contributory negligence.” In other words, when you’re partially responsible, you collect less.

In a criminal context, however, contributory negligence is rarely applied in vehicular manslaughter cases. For example, suppose the victim driver had a blood alcohol level above the legal limit, but the defendant instigated a drag racing manoeuver that resulted in the victim’s death. Most judges would not allow the jury to hear evidence about the deceased’s blood alcohol level.

Penalties and Sentencing

Many states recognize different degrees of vehicular manslaughter. Statutes typically authorize more severe punishment for vehicular manslaughter convictions involving drunk or drugged drivers, as opposed to convictions based on non-DUI traffic offenses. For example, in Georgia, a driver who causes a death while intoxicated can be charged with first-degree vehicular homicide, a felony carrying up to fifteen years in prison. But a driver who causes a death while committing a moving traffic offense (such as failure to maintain lane position), is guilty of second-degree vehicular homicide, a misdemeanor carrying a maximum of a year in jail.

Penalties for vehicular manslaughter (both misdemeanors and felonies) differ greatly from state to state. In Alabama, for example, a person convicted of vehicular manslaughter based on DUI faces a maximum of five years in prison, while a person in Minnesota convicted of the same offense faces up to thirty years’ incarceration.

Possible Defenses to Vehicular Manslaughter

Common defense strategies in vehicular manslaughter cases include attempts to exclude incriminating evidence, such as test results showing that the defendant was driving with a blood-alcohol level above 0.08. A defense attorney may argue that such evidence should be excluded because it was obtained in violation of the defendant’s constitutional rights, or because law enforcement did not comply with procedures established for collecting the evidence.

A defendant may also argue that his intoxication was not the legal cause of the accident resulting in death (not an available defense in Florida, however; see above). Instead, a defendant may argue that an independent intervening event outside of the defendant’s control is the cause of the death instead of the defendant’s intoxication. For example, in Washington state, a defendant may be acquitted of vehicular homicide where a jury or judge finds that an intervening act caused the death, but the intervening event must be one that is not reasonably foreseeable.

A defendant may also present evidence that his reckless driving or apparent intoxication is due not to alcohol or drugs, but because of a pre-existing medical condition or medical emergency. While evidence of a medical condition can undermine a prosecutor’s claim that a defendant was under the influence of intoxicants, a person who chooses to drive despite a known medical condition may still be charged with vehicular homicide if that decision to drive is considered negligent or reckless.

Learn about the steps you need to take when Facing Criminal Charges.

See a Lawyer

If you are facing charges of vehicular manslaughter, it’s important to consult with a lawyer as soon as possible. An experienced criminal defense attorney can evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the evidence against you, explain possible defenses and help you develop evidence to support them, and set out the options open to you. These options might range from obtaining a dismissal to pleading guilty as charged in exchange for a specific sentence, negotiating a reduction in charges in exchange for a plea, or going to trial. Only someone who understands how prosecutors and judges in your courthouse tend to handle cases like yours can give you realistic and helpful advice.

Read More

Tags: penalties, Laws, under the influence, homicide, crime, vehicular manslaughter, intoxicated

What Are Extenuating Circumstances?

Posted by Chris Morales on Fri, Nov 20, 2015 @ 09:00 AM

A crime may be charged as a lesser offense, or a sentence may be light, if extenuating circumstances (or mitigating factors) convince the prosecutor or judge to cut the defendant a break.

Two people rob a convenience store at gunpoint. One is a 13-year-old girl, with no criminal record, a runaway with a drug problem, who has fallen under the spell of an older man. The other is her 26-year-old boyfriend. He has a long criminal history, including other armed robberies. The robbery was his idea, and he planned the crime and obtained the weapons. Are these two people equally responsible for their criminal conduct? Do they deserve the same sentence? If not, why not?

Extenuating circumstances are facts that tend to lessen the severity of a crime or its punishment by making the defendant’s conduct understandable or less blameworthy. Extenuating circumstances might include a defendant’s young age, mental illness or addiction, or minor role in the crime. For example, people sometimes break the law while acting in accordance with their religious or cultural beliefs, and this might be considered an extenuating circumstance. A parent who is convicted of child abuse for failing to obtain medical care for a child for religious reasons might be considered less culpable than a person who does the same thing due to neglect, and might raise this issue as a defense to a criminal charge.

How Are Extenuating Circumstances Used?

In law, the concept of extenuating circumstances, sometimes called mitigating circumstances, is broad and the term may mean different things to different jurists. Sometimes, it refers onlyto factors that impact sentencing. Other times, it refers to anything short of a defense that makes the defendant’s criminal behavior less blameworthy and results in a less serious charge or sentence. Sometimes, what is an affirmative defense in some situations or states is an extenuating circumstance is others.

For example, possession of any nude or sexual image of a child under the age of 18 is a crime (child pornography). Sometimes, state laws are written in a way that takes extenuating circumstances into account. In such states, a teen who possesses a nude cell phone picture of another teen might be charged with the less serious crime of teen sexting. Even if the law is not explicit in how to deal with the defendant's age, in many states, if the defendant is also under the age of 18 and the teen depicted willingly sent the image, the crime will be punished less severely than if the defendant were an adult with a collection of computer child pornography.

Decision-makers in the criminal justice system, such as police officers, prosecutors, judges and jurors, are always considering extenuating circumstances along with all the other facts in deciding how best to handle a case. If a person with a developmental disability steals a soda from a store, a police officer might decide not to make an arrest, a prosecutor might decide not to charge the person at all or to charge a person with a less serious crime, the jury might decide not to convict, or a judge might sentence the defendant to a lighter sentence than the maximum.

Aggravating Circumstances

In contrast, aggravating circumstances make a crime more severe or serious. Common aggravating circumstances include the defendant's lengthy prior record or that the crime caused serious injury to a victim.

Capital Cases

Normally, judges, not jurors decide a defendant’s punishment, based not only on the law and the facts, but often on a probation report, which often contains many details about a defendant’s life that are not necessarily part of the criminal case. Death penalty cases are unique because, in most states, jurors decide whether to sentence a defendant to life in prison or death.

In making those decisions, jurors are first required to consider any mitigating (extenuating) circumstances. Mitigating circumstances are not defenses or excuses, but factors that tend to reduce the defendant's blame. State laws vary, but in some states, jurors are required to find the existence of aggravating and mitigating circumstances and then assign weight to these circumstances in fixing the verdict. Examples of mitigating circumstances in capital cases include the defendant's:

  • lack of a prior criminal record
  • extreme mental or emotional disturbance at the time of the crime
  • belief that the crime was justified
  • role as a minor participant in the crime
  • old age or youth (including being a minor), or
  • extreme duress.

In addition, the jury may take into account that the victim was participating in the crime with defendant; and consider any mental illness, disability, or serious intoxication that prevented defendant from understanding or controlling his or her behavior, as well as any other circumstances that lessen the severity of the crime.

Obtaining Legal Assistance

If you were arrested or charged with a crime, but believe that extenuating circumstances are present, you should talk to an attorney about your case. An experienced criminal defense attorney will be able to explain the law, and how to best present your extenuating circumstances so that you achieve the best possible outcome in your case.

Read More

Tags: defendant, Criminal Defense, punishment, judge, criminal record, attorney, defense, crime

How Judges Set Bail

Posted by Chris Morales on Fri, Nov 13, 2015 @ 07:10 AM

Judges set bail based initially on a "bail schedule," but they can raise or lower the amount, based on the circumstances of the case.

Judges ordinarily set a bail amount at a suspect’s first court appearance after an arrest, which may be either a bail hearing or an arraignment. Judges normally adhere to standard practices (for example, setting bail in the amount of $500 for nonviolent petty misdemeanors). However, judges can raise or lower the standard bail, or waive bail altogether and grant release on the defendant's "own recognizance," or O.R., based on the circumstances of an individual case.

(For related information, see Can you appeal a judge's bail order?)

Defendants do not need a lawyer to to arrange for bail. They can either post cash bail personally, or phone a bail bond seller and arrange for a bond. Relatives or friends can come to a jail or court and post cash bail for an arrested person or purchase a bond from a bail bond seller.

Factors That Influence Bail Amounts

In addition to the seriousness of the charged crime, the amount of bail usually depends on factors such as a defendant’s past criminal record, whether a defendant is employed, and whether a defendant has close ties to relatives and the community.

Judges may legally deny bail altogether in some circumstances. For example, if another jurisdiction has placed a warrant (hold) on a defendant, a judge is likely to keep the defendant in custody at least long enough for the other jurisdiction to pursue its charge. And bail may be denied to a defendant who is likely to flee the jurisdiction before the case concludes.

Example: Rosie Olla is arrested and charged with managing a large prostitution ring. Rosie is a naturalized American citizen born in Spain, and her family still lives in Barcelona. While searching Rosie after her arrest, the police found that she was carrying a passport and $5,000 in cash. Under these circumstances, a judge will probably be very reluctant to set bail for Rosie. Her family background and the fact that she was carrying a passport and a large amount of cash suggest that Rosie may flee to Spain if she is released on bail. Unless Rosie can explain to the judge why she was carrying the passport and cash, and can also demonstrate strong ties to the local community, a judge is likely to deny her request for bail.

Bail Schedules

In many areas of the country, defendants can post bail with the police even before they are brought to court for a bail hearing or an arraignment. Many jails have posted bail schedules, which specify bail amounts for common crimes. An arrested defendant can obtain release immediately after booking by paying the amount of bail set forth in the jailhouse bail schedule. Bail schedules can vary considerably according to locality, type of crime, and residency.

As a general rule, bail for offenses classified as felonies is five to ten times the bail required for misdemeanors. The more serious and dangerous the crime, the higher the amount of bail is likely to be. As a general rule, a jailhouse bail schedule is inflexible. The police will not accept bail other than as set forth in a schedule; suspects wanting to pay less must go before a judge.

As an alternative or in addition to jailhouse bail schedules, some areas have duty judges. A duty judge is available to fix bail over the phone, without the necessity for a formal court hearing. Like a jailhouse bail schedule, using a duty judge is an option for arrested persons who are anxious to bail out of jail before going to court.

Police Practices That Affect Bail Amounts

Unfortunately for many suspects who want to bail out of jail quickly, the police tend to arrest suspects for the most serious criminal charge that can possibly be supported by the facts at their disposal. For instance, the police may treat possession of a small amount of marijuana (a misdemeanor in most states) as an arrest for possession of marijuana with intent to sell (a felony in all states). Even though such a charge will almost certainly be reduced to a misdemeanor later in the case, it is a felony for the purposes of the bail schedule, and bail will be set accordingly.

This article was excerpted from The Criminal Law Handbook, by Paul Bergman, J.D., and Sara J. Berman, J.D.

Read More

Tags: defendant, judge, arrest, criminal record, suspect, misdemeanors, petty, bail, crime, police

Is it legal to secretly audio record the police?

Posted by Chris Morales on Wed, Nov 04, 2015 @ 10:30 AM

Almost all courts confronted with the issue have decided that the First Amendment gives you the right to record an officer in public while he is performing his duties. But laws in some places prohibit people from recording officers surreptitiously (or secretly).

(For more about the right to record, and for more on its limitations, see Recording the Police: Legal? To learn about lawsuits against police related to recording activities, see Can you sue the police if they stop you from recording them?)

Whether the conversation the officer is having is the kind of “private” oral communication that would trigger a state’s wiretapping, electronic surveillance, or eavesdropping laws depends on the situation, and on the courts’ interpretation of the relevant law.

“Private" generally conveys that the conversation is intended only for those involved in the conversation or who hold a confidential relationship with the speaker, or that the conversation is otherwise not open or in public. On the other hand, the fact that communications are made in public doesn’t necessarily mean they aren’t private. (State v. Flora, 68 Wash. App. 802 (Div. 1 1992).)

The following are situations where a court found that a law enforcement officer didn’t have a reasonable expectation that his conversation was private. As such, the citizen’s recording didn’t constitute a crime under the relevant wiretapping, surveillance, or eavesdropping law.

  • An officer was talking loudly in a public park on a radio through an open window of his patrol vehicle. (Johnson v. Hawe, 388 F.3d 676 (9th Cir. 2004).)
  • Officers were searching a car on the shoulder of a busy public highway with the doors open, talking audibly (whether they thought others could hear them or not). They were taking no care to make their statements private. (In this case, the court was influenced by the public status of officers performing their duties in public, stating that police do not generally have a reasonable expectation of privacy when interacting with suspects.) (Hornberger v. Am. Broad. Companies, Inc., 351 N.J. Super. 577 (App. Div. 2002).)

Whether you may lawfully record the police depends on the circumstances and the law in your jurisdiction. One court might find that it was legal to secretly record the police under a particular set of facts, while another might come to a different conclusion. If you plan to record officers, you may want to consult a lawyer. Certainly do so if you’ve been arrested or prosecuted, even if not for recording. A knowledgeable lawyer will be able to explain your jurisdiction’s laws, give you advice, and protect your rights.

Read More

Tags: legal rights, audio, confrontations, court, law enforcement, record, limitations, crime, police, records

Court-Appointed "Panel" Attorneys

Posted by Chris Morales on Wed, Oct 28, 2015 @ 11:37 AM

When there's no public defender office, or the P.D. can't take the case, the court will appoint a lawyer who is on the indigent "panel."

A "panel attorney" is a lawyer who signs-up with the court to handle indigent cases when the public defender's office cannot represent the client. In some counties, where there is no public defender office, all indigent defense work is handled by panel attorneys. Being a panel attorney is a good way to have a steady stream of work, and payment (from the courts) is reliable.

When Panel Attorneys Are Appointed

In counties that have public defender offices, panel attorneys are appointed when a judge decides that there's a "conflict of interest" that prevents representation by the P.D. In counties without P.D. offices, panel attorneys are appointed when the judge determines that the defendant meets the requirements for indigency.

A P.D. would not be allowed to represent a defendant because of a conflict of interest in the following situations:

When two defendants are charged with jointly committing a crime. Even if both are indigent, the public defender’s office cannot represent both because each defendant may try to point the finger at the other as being more to blame.

When the victim is a former public defender client. In this situation, the P.D. would have two conflicting duties: (1) to vigorously represent the current client’s interests, and (2) to not disclose any information learned from the ­previous client in confidence. To fulfill the duty of vigorous representation in the current case, the P.D. would have to use any information known about the victim that might put the victim’s testimony in doubt. Yet this could easily violate the duty owed by the P.D. to the previous client (the victim in the present case) to not use that informa­tion.

The same conflict arises when one of the prosecution's witnesses is a former public defender client.

In these situations, public ­defender offices sometimes try to avoid conflict of ­interest problems by following a “don’t peek” policy. Under this policy, a P.D. stays on a case by promising not to look in the P.D. office’s files to dig up nasty but confidential information against a former client. Judges have an economic incentive to accept such promises: It’s almost always cheaper to appoint a second P.D. than a private panel attorney. However, many counties won't practice "don't peek," realizing that it's one thing to keep the file shut, but another to expect people to keep memories at bay.

How Good is My Panel Attorney Likely to Be?

The competence of your panel attorney, like that of his public defender counterpart, will depend on how experienced he is, and how many other lawyers in his position are vying to be placed on the panel. In areas where many criminal defense lawyers are available for work, getting onto the panel is quite desirable, and courts can be very choosy about whom they select. On the other hand, in areas with a dearth of lawyers, the courts may have few choices and may end up with less experienced attorneys. Often, panels are made up of former public defenders who have left the government office to go into private practice.

Getting a Second Opinion

Defendants who think their court-appointed attorneys are not representing them adequately should consider checking the court-appointed lawyer’s advice with a private defense attorney. Even an indigent defendant may be able to pay for a short second opinion consultation with a private defense attorney. Or, a defendant may have friends who can check with an attorney who has represented them.

Defendants often talk to other defendants facing similar charges to find out if their attorneys have provided different advice. Be very careful if you do this: Remember that because each case is unique, advice for different defendants—even those charged with the same crime—may vary greatly and still be valid. Also remember that the conversation will not be confidential and can be disclosed to the prosecution. Many a defendant has been undone by the testimony of a jailhouse neighbor who was consulted for legal advice.

This article was excerpted from The Criminal Law Handbook, by Paul Bergman, J.D., and Sara J. Berman, J.D.

Read More

Tags: charge, public defender. appointed attorney, court, indigent, jailhouse, appointed, crime, prosecution, witness

Criminal Charges: How Cases Get Started

Posted by Chris Morales on Fri, Oct 09, 2015 @ 08:00 AM

How police officers and prosecutors initiate criminal cases.

A criminal case usually gets started with a police arrest report. The prosecutor then decides what criminal charges to file, if any. Some cases can then go to a grand jury for a criminal indictment or to a preliminary hearing, where a judge decides if there is enough evidence to proceed. Here's how this all works.

Read More

Tags: Criminal Charges, jurors, trial, complaint, preliminary hearing, jury, crime

What Are Extenuating Circumstances?

Posted by Chris Morales on Tue, Sep 08, 2015 @ 09:45 AM

A crime may be charged as a lesser offense, or a sentence may be light, if extenuating circumstances (or mitigating factors) convince the prosecutor or judge to cut the defendant a break.

Read More

Tags: Criminal Defense, charge, criminal justice system, prosecutors, criminal conduct, crime, lesser offense, prior record

Searching Your Home After an Arrest

Posted by Chris Morales on Fri, Sep 04, 2015 @ 09:20 AM

When you're arrested in your home, a limited search by the police is permissible.

Police may search the person arrested and the area within that person’s immediate control. Immediate control is interpreted broadly to include any place a suspect may lunge to obtain a weapon. If the alleged crime is particularly violent, or if the police have reason to believe other armed suspects may be in the residence, the police may do a protective sweep to search any place such accomplices may be hiding. Also, while they are making a lawful arrest or protective sweep, the police may typically search and seize anything that is in plain view and appears to be related to criminal activity.

Looking for Accomplices

Police officers can make protective sweeps following an arrest (Maryland v. Buie, U.S. Sup. Ct. 1990). When making a protective sweep, police officers can walk through a residence and make a cursory visual inspection of places where an accomplice might be hiding. For example, police officers could look under beds and inside closets. To justify making a protective sweep, police officers must have a reasonable belief that a dangerous accomplice might be hiding inside a residence. If a sweep is lawful, the police can legally seize contraband or evidence of crime that is in plain view.

Example: Police officers have warrants to arrest Fox and Mulder for armed bank robbery. Fox and Mulder live together in a house. Officers Spock and Kirk stake out the house and arrest Fox coming up the driveway. With Fox in custody, Officer Spock goes into the house to conduct a protective sweep. Spock goes into a bedroom, lifts up a mattress and seizes a gun hidden between the mattress and the box spring. Witnesses later identify the gun as the one used in the bank robbery. Spock did not lawfully seize the gun. Because Fox and Mulder lived together, Fox was arrested outside the house, and they were suspected of committing a violent crime together, Spock probably had the right to make a protective sweep to look for Mulder. However, although Spock had a right to look under the bed, Spock had no right to lift up the mattress because nothing suggested that Mulder might be hiding between the mattress and box spring. After making sure that Mulder wasn’t in the house, the officers should have secured the house and gotten a search warrant.

Searching Guests in a Home

Police sometimes search not only the arrested person, but guests who are also present. Whether such a search is legal depends on why the guests are there. If they are there for purely social reasons or to spend the night, they are probably protected against unreasonable searches and seizures to the same extent as the homeowner or tenant. However, if the guests are there for a brief commercial transaction or an illegal purpose and are not staying overnight, then they do not have the same privacy rights as social overnight guests and may not be able to successfully challenge a police search that took place in their host’s home (Minnesota v. Carter, U.S. Sup. Ct. 1998).

Example: Mark hosts a weekly poker game at his apartment. One night the game included his neighbor Bobby. After a neighbor complained about a strange smell coming from Mark’s apartment, the police arrived and, although they didn’t have a warrant, searched the premises. In a cabinet in the bathroom, they found a baggie of illegal drugs belonging to Bobby. Bobby is arrested and charged with possession of illegal drugs. Bobby cannot exclude the drugs from evidence. As a temporary guest, Bobby has no privacy right in Mark’s apartment. 

 This article was excerpted from The Criminal Law Handbook, by Paul Bergman, J.D., and Sara J. Berman, J.D.

Read More

Tags: arrest, search warrant, protective sweep, crime, police, permissible

What Are Felonies, Misdemeanors, and Infractions?

Posted by Chris Morales on Wed, Sep 02, 2015 @ 09:30 AM
Read More

Tags: state, felony, murder, prison, prosecutors, rape, misdemeanor, infraction, criminal, crime