Menu

Category: Charges Dismissed

Do I Need a Criminal Defense Attorney if I am Innocent?

Posted on by Ross Erlich

Short answer is yes.

If you think you’ve been falsely accused, or arrested, for a crime you didn’t commit, you are not alone.  There are countless examples of people who have been arrested, and even charged, for things they haven’t done.  Witnesses who are incorrect, victims who are lying or misleading, facts that don’t add up, etc.

One may think that the right course of action is to cooperate with law enforcement and that there is no need to hire a lawyer.  Great, save some money!  Well, probably not the best idea.  Remember, the prosecutor cannot use your right to remain silent or your hiring of a lawyer against you.

In fact, if you are a suspect in a case, simply denying your involvement is not going to help much.  Cops have heard that thousands of times.  Law enforcement do not determine your fate in court, they do not file or dismiss criminal charges, they do not offer plea deals.  Their job is to investigate and make an arrest, with the emphasis on the make an arrest part.  It is easier for them to put together what they believe to be facts support your guilt, make an arrest, and pass it along to the prosecutor’s office.  They “tend” to believe you are guilty, then look for facts to support that belief.

Let me give you a story about a former client that might help illustrate the purpose of this blog post.  I represented a woman a few years ago who was charged with felony hit-and-run and felony assault with a deadly weapon causing great bodily injury for, allegedly, causing an accident with a speeding motorcyclist (estimated at 60mph) who broke his leg and then she left the scene.  This happened in the San Fernando Valley near a large big box shopping store and alongside a major busy street.  She came to me, while being represented by another attorney, after she had already had her preliminary hearing (evidentiary hearing determining probable cause in the case) and after a judge had determined there was enough probable cause that this crime was committed by her.

The police and prosecution’s take was that she had caused this accident and then was found parked alongside the business driveway of this big box store doing paperwork in her car.  There was a witness who believed her saw her car, believed to have followed her through the parking lot (even though he lost sight of her), and then came across her car parked where she was.  The police were wearing body cameras when they approached my client and you could see a few key things in that footage.  A complete lack of any damage to her vehicle, her being cool, calm and collected, a car that was filled with lots of boxes of paperwork (which wasn’t strewed about after an accident) and windows that were not tinted.  Oh, there was also some security camera footage from a taco truck that was across the street.

The prosecutor’s office believed that the eyewitness had, in fact, seen what he claimed to have seen, believed that the not-so-great security camera footage was my client’s car and, despite body camera footage and police report documentation that showed no major body damage, still believed my client was good for the crime.

Also keep in mind that my client was adamant about her innocence, often pointing out discrepancies in the reports, and looking for an attorney who could help her prove her innocence.  She had also just spent months with a different lawyer going back and forth to court with them believing she did it and, ultimately, having a preliminary hearing where the prosecutor was able to convince the judge that she did as well.  Not to mention, her defense attorney, who had access to the same evidence I did, couldn’t prove her innocence.

When I got on the case, I knew that my client was telling the truth.  The security camera footage showed the car driving down then main street after the accident away from the business driveway where she was found, there was no damage anywhere on my client’s vehicle from an accident like this, the security camera footage seemed to show 2 persons in the vehicle that caused the accident and a 911 caller mentioned that they believed the car to be a Honda Civic, which was not what my client was driving.

So, what do you do now?  The most stressful client a lawyer can have is an innocent one.  There is a reason this is a commonly known phrase.  You can see in this example how an innocent person could make it halfway down the road towards either a conviction or a forced plea deal to avoid the potential damage a conviction at trial could cause.  How an innocent person could go to court multiple times without having their innocence proven.  It’s a scary thing.

What I had to do was to clearly, and overwhelmingly, show the prosecutor the evidence that they may have overlooked which, when added up, equaled innocence.  I had to put together a package that included timelines, clips of video, mentions to 911 call, lack of car damage, her statements to police.  Had an investigator drive through the parking lot with me on video to show how it was almost impossible for this witness to maintain view of this car through the parking lot.  Even after all of that, the prosecutor needed to take that all and present it to the supervisor to get permission to dismiss.  This was a months-long, multiple appearance effort on my part, not something that just got remedied in one court appearance and a quick conversation.

Eventually, all charges were dismissed against my client.

As you can see, even if you are innocent, it is crucial to have a skilled Los Angeles criminal defense attorney represent you.  Even in this example, police saw who they thought was “good for” the crime and put together the facts they could find to support it.  No matter that my client proclaimed her innocence from the time she was contacted by police up until this very day.

If you or someone you know has been charged with, or is being investigated for, a crime here in Los Angeles or surrounding counties, contact attorney Ross Erlich today for a free consultation.

The Camera (does not) Add Probable Cause

Posted on by Ross Erlich

An LAPD officer was arrested last week on charges of filing a false police report and perjury (oops!).  The officer, a 13-year veteran, was assigned to LAPD West Traffic Division, which is responsible for all handling all traffic-related investigations and enforcement.

Apparently, the LAPD’s Internal Affairs Division conducted an investigation that stemmed from concerns from the LA City Attorney’s Office regarding footage they viewed on the officer’s body-worn camera videos.  And, would you believe it, investigators established that the “camera footage was inconsistent with the written report.”

In English, the camera footage showed one thing and the cop’s written report stated another.  As a result, the DUI charge at issue was not filed.  So, sounds like the officer added a little probable cause to arrest to his written report either thinking that no one would notice or view the body-worn camera, or he just wasn’t thinking at all.

With the increasing use of body-worn cameras by the LAPD, we are now able to see what the officer sees during their encounter with our clients.  Thus, we can compare the contents of the video with what was stated in their written report and, in certain cases, point out meaningful inconsistencies to the prosecutor.  This story above is a perfect example.

Another example, that comes from dashboard camera footage, is a report that might state the my client failed to use a turn signal and this was the moving violation that gave the officer probable cause to initiate a traffic stop (pull the person over).  After pulling them over and talking with them, it was believed that the client was driving under the influence and subsequently arrested.  Well, after viewing the dash-cam footage, it was clear that the client did, in fact, use his turn signal and you can be sure this was politely pointed out to the prosecutor.

If you don’t have probable cause to stop, your arrest crumbles.  Attorney Ross Erlich is always looking out for the availability of dash-cam footage, body-worn camera footage, and other forms of surveillance footage that can help disprove the allegations made by law enforcement.  Leave no stone unturned, a wise person once said.  That’s all part of the job.

If you or someone you know has been arrested or given a notice to appear in court in Los Angeles, contact attorney Ross Erlich today for a free case consultation.

Vandalism – more than meets the eye

Posted on by admin

California Penal Code section 594 is the statute the defines what vandalism is.  That section states that “every person who maliciously commits any of the following acts with respect to any real or personal property not his or her own, is guilty of vandalism.”  Those acts are 1) graffiti, 2) damaging, or 3) destroying.  In short, if you damage, destroy or cover with graffiti any property that is not yours, that is vandalism.  Thus, it’s not just those young kids spraying graffiti on the walls, it’s items broken during a fight, breaking things in a store, crashing a stolen car, etc.

But, this definition requires that you have malicious or unlawful intent with regards to the damage.  Thus, if you accidentally damaged or defaced someone’s property, you wouldn’t be guilty of vandalism.

Now, many people might view a vandalism case or charge as something relatively minor.  “Hey, I damaged some property and no big deal, I’ll just plead guilty and pay to replace it.”  Well, as the title to this blog reads, it’s a little more than meets the eye.  Upon a conviction for vandalism, fines, yes, fines, can run you anywhere between $400 and $50,000.  Yes, you heard correctly, $50,000.  Much of this depends on the amount of the property that was damaged, but those are just the fines!

So, in addition to owing significant fines to the court for a conviction of vandalism, you might also have to deal with the fact that you’ve actually been convicted of a crime and that your criminal history now reflects that.  If the damage is $400 or more, vandalism can be charged as either a felony or misdemeanor.  If the damage is under $400, the charge will be filed as a misdemeanor.  Thus, any employer or future employer or state licensing board will see this in your background check and this will raise some red flags.  In Los Angeles county, the standard probation for a misdemeanor conviction is 3 years and for those 3 years, you cannot have your conviction expunged unless a judge agrees to terminate that probation early.

Also, the court has the authority, and “shall do so when feasible”, order you to show up and clean, repair or replace the damaged property.  The court can also order that your driver’s license be suspended upon a conviction for vandalism for up to 2 years, order mandatory counseling and/or community service.

So, you might be asking yourself, “what do I do to fight all of these penalties and obligations?”  I thought you would never ask!  There are a number of ways to fight a vandalism charge and the first, in my mind, comes down to whether you actually intended to cause damage to the property or what it an accident or mistake.  Also, what was the nature of the property (shared, formerly yours, not owned, etc).

I would also want to know who the “victim” in the matter is and the relation of that person to my client.  A lot of property damage crimes can be resolved by simply reaching out to the victim and working out a way for that person to be made whole and have their property brought back to the condition it was in prior to the incident or paid for.

There might be a way to get a civil compromise in this case which, if worked out, can have criminal proceedings permanently suspended (effectively case dismissed) if the victim signs off on an agreement that they were made whole and compensated for any out-of-pocket expenses they may have had as a result of the conduct.

In short, you don’t want to get convicted of vandalism or any other property damage crime.  As you can see, there are a number of variables that come with getting convicted and too many options that a judge has discretion over to order as additional penalties against you.  You want to leave as little to discretion as possible and ensure that you get a result that is clear and guaranteed and something that has as little impact on your record and freedom as possible.

Contact Ross Erlich Law for a free case consultation and find out about additional ways to keep yourself free.

 

Public Intoxication Charges Dropped Against Former LAPD Commander

Posted on by admin

You might recall hearing about an LAPD Commander and an LAPD sergeant who were involved in a traffic incident in Glendale in which the Commander was charged with public intoxication and the sergeant, the driver of the vehicle, being arrested and charged with DUI.  In short, Glendale police came across a vehicle that was stopped for some reason, with the driver, the LAPD sergeant, asleep in the driver’s seat, and the commander taken into custody for public intoxication.

The commander was recorded on cell phone being led out of an unmarked LAPD vehicle by several Glendale Police Department officers.

Court records showed that the Los Angeles District Attorney’s office dismissed the public intoxication charges against the commander this week and have not confirm the reason for the dismissal.  The sergeant has pleaded not guilty to DUI charges stemming from the incident.

There has been much discussion already about getting a DUI in Los Angeles in previous blog posts.  If you or someone you know has been arrested for DUI in Los Angeles, contact Los Angeles criminal defense lawyer Ross Erlich today for a free case consultation.

But what about public intoxication?  Many people seem to believe that if you get arrested for public intoxication, the police simply bring you to the local jail to “sleep it off” and you get released the next day.  Well, that is not quite accurate and you could find yourself being released the next day with a misdemeanor citation to appear at a future court date.

Public intoxication is a violation of California Penal Code section 647(f), which states that any person who is found in any public place under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or any combination, in a condition that he or she is unable to exercise care for his or her own safety or the safety of others, or if being under the influence interferes with or obstructs or prevents the free use of any street, sidewalk or other public way, is guilty of disorderly conduct.

Thus, it is not illegal to be drunk or under the influence in a public place.  It is only illegal if you cannot exercise care for your safety or the safety of others, or, if you interfere or obstruct a street or sidewalk.

Because it is a misdemeanor, the charge is punishable by up to 6 months in jail and/or a $1,000 fine.  Also, the conviction will be recorded on your criminal record and this can create issues for employment and obtaining a professional license with the state of California.

Just because you are charged with public intoxication doesn’t mean that you will be convicted of it.  Depending on your prior criminal record, if any, and what other charges are filed along with the public intoxication, if any, you may be eligible to enter into a diversionary sentence.  This can take the form of a number of different arrangements, including completing a drug treatment program, classes, attending NA or AA classes or some other community service type work in exchange for the charges to be dismissed.

If you or someone you know has been charged with DUI or public intoxication in Los Angeles, Orange county, San Bernardino county or Riverside county, contact Los Angeles criminal defense lawyer Ross Erlich today.