California Criminal Defense Blog

Earlier this week, prosecutors charged a 20-year-old Alabama man with 12 counts of sodomy. The charges were based on acts that were committed over a nine-month period with a 14-year-old girl.

The police chief acknowledged that there was no force involved in the sodomy and that both parties were willing participants, but that because of the alleged victim’s age, she could not legally consent to the behavior.

Sodomy between consenting adults is legal in all 50 states. However, individuals are still subject to prosecution for illegal acts of sodomy. This includes engaging in sodomy with a minor.

For example, Penal Code 286 PC, California’s sodomy law separately punishes acts of sodomy with a minor depending on the age of the alleged victim (and sometimes even on the age of the defendant).

This is because minors are legally deemed unable to give consent. This means that even if a minor willingly engages in sodomy, the person with whom he/she engages is still subject to prosecution under Penal Code 286 PC, California’s sodomy law.

That said, if the defendant honestly and reasonably believes that the minor is an adult (that is, 18 or older) and that minor is a willing participant to the act, that mistake of age will serve as a defense. But due to social concerns about protecting young children, this mistake defense doesn’t apply to minors who are 14 or under.

R&B singer D’Angelo, whose real name is Michael Archer, was arrested in Manhattan over the weekend for allegedly offering an undercover cop posing as a prostitute $40 for oral sex. D’Angelo is maintaining his innocence and has plead not guilty to the charge.

So, the big question is, will D’Angelo argue that he was entrapped? The legal defense of entrapment is raised almost every time an undercover cop is involved in a case alleging solicitation of a prostitute.

In California, for example, the Los Angeles Police Department is notorious for sending out “decoy” officers to pose as prostitutes. These undercover cops look for “johns” to engage in conversation and to ultimately arrest for soliciting illegal sex.

Under California law, entrapment only refers to situations where a law-abiding person is coerced into committing a crime that he/she otherwise would not have. If the officer simply offered D’Angelo sex in exchange for money, her conduct wouldn’t rise to the level of entrapment. If, however, she appealed to his ego and used flattery to get him to put up the cash, he could absolutely claim that he was entrapped.

Whether the conversation was recorded, whether there were any other witnesses to the alleged conversation, and the specifics of the conversation will all be critical issues in D’Angelo’s defense.

Yep, that’s right. Eric Williamson was convicted of violating Virginia’s indecent exposure law. This case received national attention because of the fact that Williamson was in his own home at the time of the offense.

Police arrested Williamson after a mother and her 7-year-old son claimed that as they walked by Williamson’s home, he made a point of making his “naked self” visible to them.

Under California’s “indecent exposure” law, Penal Code 314 PC, unless Williamson purposely “flashed” himself to the mother and son and drew attention to his genitals, he could not have been convicted of indecent exposure. This is because California’s “indecent exposure” law under Penal Code 314 PC requires

1. that you intentionally expose yourself or your “private parts”,


2. in a public area or area where people were present and likely to be offended, and


3. you acted in a lewd manner while drawing attention to your genitals.

Continue reading "Man Convicted for Indecent Exposure...In His Own Home" »

In Nevada, that is. Nevada is currently the only state where prostitution is legal…as long as it is confined to brothels located in specific counties within the state. Until recently, these brothels only hired women in accordance with the state’s health and safety laws that required licensed prostitutes to undergo frequent cervical testing to ensure they remain STD free.

Within a couple of weeks, one of the state’s legal brothels is hoping to hire a few men to service their clients. This is thanks to a new regulation that provides for urethral testing for men to ensure the same health standards for both sexes.

Continue reading "Introducing the First Legal Male Prostitutes" »

The LAPD is making an increasing number of arrests at Elysian Park for Penal Code 647(a) Lewd Conduct in Public. Most of the arrests involve undercover decoy officers posing as gay men cruising at the park. When an unsuspecting gay visitor cruises or propositions one of the decoys, officers move in and make an arrest.

Penal Code 647(a) makes it a misdemeanor in California to touch your private parts, or those of another person, in public in a situation where you know or should know of the presence of third parties who would be offended by the conduct. The crime is punishable by up to a year of county jail time.

We find that most people arrested for "lewd conduct in public" at Elysian Park (and elsewhere) are innocent and wrongfully accused. Specifically, most gay men who seek to engage in sexual activity in public choose a remote spot. This may be an otherwise empty bathroom or a secluded section of the park. Because there is no one else present who would appear likely to take offense, the conduct, even if sexual in nature, doesn't meet the legal definition of lewd conduct.

Continue reading "Suspects Wrongfully Accused of Lewd Conduct at Elysian Park" »

People convicted of certain sex offenses in California have the onerous requirement of lifetime registration as a sex offender. This means they must register with the local police every time they move and every year within 5 days of their birthday. Many sex offender registrants are displayed on the state's Megan's Law website for the world to see.

Being labeled in the community as a convicted sex offender brings terrible shame--and danger--to those on "the list." Registrants experience difficulty finding jobs, housing and friends, and many get targeted with threats and violence. Some of the fear and disdain towards registrants is warranted. But many of them are rehabilitated people trying to make a life for themselves in an increasingly hostile world.

Sex offender registration is today's equivalent of leprosy in biblical times.

Not surprisingly, we get frequent calls from people desperately seeking to a reprieve from the Penal Code 290 sex offender registration requirements. Can this be done...and how?

There's basically three paths to clearing one's status as a California registered sex offender. The first is seeking to vacate the underlying conviction that triggered the registration requirement. This usually rests on showing that the attorney was incompetent, that new exonerating evidence was discovered, or that the person pled guilty without being properly apprised of the consequences.

Continue reading "Ending Penal Code 290 Registration" »

People convicted of certain sex offenses in California become registered sex offenders for life. They must register with their local police department(s) every time they change their residence and every year within 5 days of their birthday.

Not completing these requirements subjects one to prosecution for Penal Code 290 Failure to Register as a Sex Offender. This is a felony punishable by up to 3 years state prison. Moreover, it counts as a strike under California three strikes law.

Many people prosecuted under Penal Code 290 already have one or two strikes on their record (stemming from the sex conviction(s) that led to the registration requirement). A two-striker who gets convicted of felony Failure to Register must go to prison for at least 25 years to life.

Not only are the Penal Code 290 requirements and penalties draconian, but California law recognizes very few excuses for failing to register. One such excuse that courts have rejected is simply "forgetting".

Continue reading "Life in Prison for Forgetfulness?" »

California child pornography laws make it illegal to produce, advertise, sell, distribute or possess images depicting children engaged in stimulating sexual conduct. Offenders face prosecution, jail time and sometimes even state prison.

The internet has become the primary medium through which people search for, purchase and obtain child pornography. Numerous clandestine sites exist that furnish or sell images and videos of naked children, sometimes engaged in apparent sexual activity.

To combat this problem, local, federal and California state authorities operate numerous internet sting operations designed to nab people on both the sales and buying sides of these transactions. On the sales side, decoy cops search the internet for vendors of child porn. They pose as purchasers. Then they locate the sellers and make arrests.

Continue reading "Internet Sting Operations Target Child Pornography" »

Sexual battery, sexual assault, and rape are often used to describe a variety of sex crimes. Because these are “legal” terms, their actual definitions are frequently misinterpreted. Unfortunately, celebrity tabloids, news sources and other media just add to the confusion. Below is a brief description of these commonly used terms.

Sexual battery (Penal Code 243.4), in California, takes place when someone touches another’s “intimate part” (a female’s breast or anyone’s buttocks, anus, groin, or sexual organ) without consent and for a sexual purpose. Depending on the circumstances, the crime may be charged as either a misdemeanor or a felony.

California looks at “sexual assault” as sort of a catchall phrase that includes any type of offensive sexual contact. It can refer to sexual battery, rape, sodomy, penetration with a foreign object, or other sexual acts that are done against one’s will or without one’s consent. Sexual assault is not a crime in-and-of itself, but rather is a term used to describe a wide variety of California sex offenses.

Rape is always a felony offense in California and is defined under California Penal Code section 261 as nonconsensual sexual intercourse. This California sex crime may be charged any time there is an act of intercourse, no matter how slight the penetration is. A California rape conviction will result in a three, six or eight year sentence in the California State Prison.

On Christmas Day 2008, the Los Angeles Times reported in an article on the arrest of Hope Jacoby, a 23-year-old athletic trainer at Tustin High School for suspicion of committing sexual offenses that included illegal sex acts with an underage boy. Orange County Sheriff’s Department spokespersons have revealed that Jacoby is under suspicion for committing oral copulation with a minor and unlawful sex with a minor.

In California, oral copulation with a minor is the act of making contact between the mouth of one person and the anus or genitals of another person where at least one of the persons involved is a minor (under the age of 18). The duration or intensity of that contact is not relevant—even a fleeting touch is sufficient under California law.

Unlawful sex with a minor is a sex act between an adult and a minor where the adult is not the spouse of the minor. Depending on the comparative ages of the persons involved as well as other factors—such as the use of force or drugs—a conviction could result in one year of jail time or up to fours incarceration in the state prison. In addition, unlawful sex with a minor can carry civil penalties of up to $25,000.

Added to these legal punishments are the long lasting social and economic damages that a conviction for a sex crime in California inflicts on the defendant. Even being arrested on the suspicion of having done these acts can hurt a person’s career and reputation—even if no charges are filed.

If your livelihood and reputation are at stake, the guidance of an experienced California sex crimes defense attorney is highly recommended. Contact us for a free case evaluation.

A 44-year-old doctor in Rowland Heights has been arrested on suspicion of sexually assaulting his patients during office visits, the San Gabriel Valley Tribune reports. Dr. Wazir Nadir Ali was reportedly booked on five counts of penetration with a foreign object and one count of sexual battery under false pretenses, according to Whittier police reports.

Police arrested the doctor after a 20-year-old woman told officials that he sexually assaulted her under the pretext of physically examining her. A similar allegation came from a 53-year-old woman. Both incidents allegedly occurred during medical appointments in 2005 and 2007 at a Bright Medical Associates facility on Whittier Boulevard in the city of Whittier where Ali had his practice.

This doctor has not yet been found guilty of the allegations. But he resigned from the hospital as soon as the allegations surfaced. According to the report, Ali’s medical license has also been suspended and he runs the risk of losing it permanently. This case is a great example of how your life could change if you face California sex crime allegations. Not only is your reputation tarnished – whether you are convicted or not – you also risk losing your job and your livelihood.

If you are facing sex crime charges in California, your best bet is to retain the services of an experienced California sex crime defense lawyer who will listen to your side of the story and independently investigate your case. Our Southern California Criminal Defense attorneys have extensive experience with sex crime cases and can help you fight the charges. Call us today to schedule your free consultation.

A birthday party clown pleaded guilty to molestation in San Bernardino County, the Daily Breeze reports. David Albert Lemus aka Trim-Trim the Clown, reportedly agreed to the plea deal at the San Bernardino Superior Court in Fontana. He faces up to 12 years in prison. Lemus’ sentencing is scheduled for Oct. 2.

The clown, who is now 51, was arrested in costume in 2005 after two girls – ages 12 and 14 – told police that Lemus molested them during the National Orange Show in San Bernardino. Lemus has pleaded guilty to charges of continuous sexual abuse of a child and oral copulation by threat. Both are felonies.

California child sex abuse cases are among the most serious crimes that can land a defendant in big trouble. If you have been charged with raping or molesting children, you face the possibility of a lengthy prison sentence, stiff penalties and registering for the rest of your life as a sex offender. With such sex offender databases being public record in California, you will have a tough time getting a job or even a place to live.

Don’t let this happen to you. If you have been accused of sex crime, please get in touch with a Southern California sex crime defense attorney to learn about your rights and discuss the best possible course of action. Our attorneys and investigators have decades of experience defending clients against serious charges and a great track record for acquittals. Please call our law offices for a free consultation today.

Nevada law as to lewd conduct offenses is generally modeled upon California law. But Nevada’s statutes cast a wider net and impose harsher punishments.

California’s Penal Code 647a Lewd Conduct in Public prohibits touching oneself sexually in public, when third parties are present who might be offended. Nevada’s NRS 201.210 Open or Gross Lewdness is based on a similar concept, but applies regardless of whether a third party who might be offended is present. Two persons engaged in sexual activity in a public location can be charged under NRS 201.210 even if they are the only two people at the location.

In terms of penalties, a person convicted of second offense of Nevada’s NRS 201.210 is guilty of a felony. A second offender under California Penal Code 647a still faces only a misdemeanor.

California’s Penal Code 288 defines lewd acts with a child under the age of 14 . Nevada’s NRS 201.230 —lewdness with a child under 14 —is almost an identical statute. Both make it a crime to touch anywhere on the child’s body if the touching is done for the sexual gratification of either the perpetrator or the child.

But California Penal Code 288 carries a penalty of up to 8 years in prison for a first offense, and 25 to life for a repeat offender. An NRS 201.230 conviction, however, carries life in prison (with the possibility of parole) on a first offense, and life without parole for the repeat offender.

Although the two states’ laws are very similar, Nevada’s has a further reach and a stronger punch.

The case of Genarlow Wilson is provides yet another reason that the general public should never blindly trust the government. This is true regardless of how strongly state legislators emphasize that their main goal is to protect their constituents from injustice and cruelty, including those constituents who happen to be accused of committing a crime.

Genarlow Wilson was convicted by a Georgia jury of aggravated child molestation for the crime of receiving oral sex from a consenting 15-year-old at a New Year’s Eve party. For this action, he received a mandatory state prison sentence of ten years, of which he served two. One of the ironies here is that, according to the applicable laws in Georgia at the time, if he had had sexual intercourse with the consenting 15 year old, he’d be facing only a misdemeanor. The other irony is that the state intervened and changed the law, defining underaged, consensual oral sex as a misdemeanor, but refused to grandfather Genarlow Wilson in. So he sat in prison.

Finally, on October 26, 2007, the Georgia State Supreme Court ruled that Genarlow’s 10-year term amounted to “cruel and unusual punishment,” and he was released after serving two of his 10 years in prison.

This is a very straightforward illustration of the peril of trusting the government in an unchecked fashion. I have been practicing criminal defense for nine years, and the assumption is always that the state is righteous, and my client is dreadfully in the wrong. Whether this is true or not is irrelevant; the important part to remember is that thorough, consistent checks on the state are the only way to ever come close to having a fair criminal justice system.

A high school basketball coach was arrested in Long Beach on suspicion of secretly capturing video footage of his teenage step daughter with a hidden camera in her bedroom closet. According to a news report in the Long Beach Press Telegram, police determined that the Milikan High School coach obtained the recordings for his own sexual gratification.

Although officials did not release the name of the coach, the Press-Telegram confirmed that it was indeed Raul Olivas, who in addition to being coach was also a math teacher at the school. The teacher has been placed on administrative leave indefinitely, the newspaper reported. Olivas was released on a $25,000 bail.

Continue reading "Long Beach Teacher Accused Of Hiding Camera In Stepdaughter’s Bedroom" »

Finding that a sheriff's detective had falsified evidence, a federal jury in Los Angeles earlier this month ordered Riverside County on Monday to pay $2 million to a man exonerated by DNA evidence after serving 12 years in prison for rape, according to an article in the Los Angeles Times.

The verdict came almost 19 years after Herman Atkins was sentenced to 45 years in prison for a 1986 rape and robbery in Lake Elsinore. Atkins steadfastly maintained his innocence. In 2000, DNA tests conducted by Richmond, Calif., forensic scientist Edward Blake, and later confirmed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, eliminated Atkins as a source of semen found on the victim’s sweater. The actual rapist was never identified.

Two years later, Atkins filed a civil damage suit alleging, among other things, that sheriff’s Det. Danny Miller had fabricated evidence and withheld information that raised doubts about whether he committed the crime. Specifically, the attorneys said Miller submitted a statement attributed to a man named Eric Ingram, who reportedly told Miller that he knew Atkins as a gang member in the Lake Elsinore area in early April 1986. The rape in question occurred on April 8, 1986. Miller reportedly included Ingram’s statement in papers seeking Atkins’ arrest warrant.

Sixteen years later, after Atkins had been released from prison, a private investigator tracked down Ingram, who signed a sworn statement saying he did not know Atkins and had not told Miller he had seen Atkins in the vicinity of the crime. Atkins was represented in his fight to overturn his conviction by lawyers from the Innocence Project at Cardozo School of Law in New York. His civil lawyers, Peter Neufeld and Deborah Cornwall contended that evidence of the fabrication could have persuaded the jury to acquit their client. The six-woman, two-man federal jury agreed, responding, “Yes” to a question on the official verdict form:

“Did Atkins prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that Miller failed to disclose favorable information to the prosecutor; specifically that he fabricated the Ingram statement?”

Continue reading "Riverside County Ordered to Pay Wrongly Convicted Man" »

A jury recently found a convicted sex offender accused of raping two teen girls in an underground bunker not guilty of kidnapping, sex crimes and assault with intent to kill, according to an article posted on the Fox News Website. The article said jurors took four hours to arrive at the verdict.

Prosecutors accused Kenneth Glenn Hinson of kidnapping the 17-year-old girls from their bedroom last year. They said Hinson then dragged them one at a time to the underground room hidden beneath a tool shed, where he raped and bound them with duct tape. Officials said Hinson expected the girls to die because the room had no air supply.

However, Hinson testified during the six-day trial that the girls had consensual sex with him. He said they made up the story so they would be able to take drugs from the underground room, which he used to store marijuana. The two young women were not in the courtroom when Hinson was acquitted. Their mothers and other relatives wept. Hinson also reportedly became emotional after the verdict announcing his acquittal was read.

If convicted, Hinson faced a mandatory life sentence without parole under the state's two-strikes law because he was convicted of raping a 12-year-old girl in 1991.

Hinson testified in his defense that he built the underground room, which was about the length and width of a mid-sized car with a ceiling about 4 1/2 feet high, behind the trailer where he lived. Hinson’s attorney picked apart inconsistencies in the teens’ testimony including how long it took them to call 911 after their alleged escape and whether they saw Hinson with a gun. But prosecutors argued that any discrepancies in the girls’ stories might have been a result of the trauma the teens went through.

Continue reading "Convicted Sex Offender Found Not Guilty of Raping Girls" »