California Criminal Defense Blog

Perhaps the most relatively recent controversial product of the often criticized California felony-murder rule is Brandon Hein. Brandon Hein, then 17, was sentenced to life in prison for his involvement in the 1995 stabbing of another teenager. The case received much publicity based on the application of the felony-murder rule.

California’s felony-murder rule holds a defendant liable for murder if he or an accomplice kills another person during the commission of (1) specifically listed felonies, or (2) “inherently dangerous” felonies. Hein’s case involved an alleged robbery, which is one of the specifically listed felonies that triggers this rule.

Hein and the other teens charged in connection with the murder claimed that they went to a house to buy marijuana when a fist fight erupted. The fight ended when the victim (the 15-year old son of a Los Angeles Police Department veteran) was stabbed in the chest by one of the teens.

Prosecutors painted a different picture, saying that the boys went to the house to steal the marijuana. Because of California’s felony-murder rule, all of the teens involved in the fight were convicted as if each of them personally stabbed the victim. This was despite the fact that all of them denied even knowing that the individual who stabbed the victim did so…or, for that matter, that he even had a weapon.

According to The Washington Post, Michael Jackson was administered a deadly dosage of propofol, an anesthetic drug that a personal physician was administering to the entertainer as a sedative to help him sleep. Though the anesthetic is not recommended for home use, particularly since necessary equipment needed for life-saving measures are not typically found within the confines of a private home, the anesthetic was given to Jackson nevertheless.

Conflicting stories paint the scene of Jackson’s final moments, with authorities questioning the amount of propofol used on the singer, and trying to ascertain whether any criminal activity took place that ultimately lead to Jackson being administered the drugs in the first place. Though numerous prescriptions were found in Jackson’s home, many prescribed by the very personal physician that administered the supposedly lethal injection of propofol, there were no prescription labels associated with the anesthetic, forcing many investigators to ask exactly where Jackson acquired it from and who was responsible for providing it to him.

Continue reading "Jackson Doctor Administered Lethal Dose" »

California self-defense laws allow people to use reasonable force (and even violence) to protect themselves against an attacker. The threat must be immediate and a person must use no more force than is reasonably necessary to thwart the attack.

But what if someone starts a fight? Can he claim self-defense as a legal defense against criminal charges?

For example, suppose Sam walks up and starts punching Robbie. Robbie starts punching back. Sam continues his attack, claiming now that he's defending himself. Can he do this?

Well, first of all, Sam's initial attack was clearly not self-defense...so for that he could get prosecuted for assault and battery at the least. But once Robbie starts fighting back, does the defense of self-defense kick in?

California law allows self-defense by an aggressor, but only if two conditions are met. First, Sam must actually and in good faith try to stop fighting. Second, he must communicate to Robbie that he wants to stop (or has stopped) fighting. If Sam does both of these and Robbie continues to fight, Sam can now fight back in lawful self-defense.

Continue reading "Can a Bully Claim Self-Defense?" »

California domestic violence laws make it illegal to use violent force (or threats of bodily harm) against an intimate partner. An intimate partner is usually defined as a current or former fiancé, spouse, cohabitant, boyfriend, girlfriend or the parent of your child.

Following a domestic violence arrest, it's not uncommon for the alleged victim to "recant." For example, suppose neighbors call the police to report that Tom and Sue are in a heated argument. The cops come. Sue has redness on her cheek and tells the officers that Tom had slapped her. Tom gets arrested for domestic battery.

A week later, Sue goes to the police station and changes her story. "I made the whole thing up. Tom never slapped me. I got that swollen cheek when I fell. I don't want to press charges." Is the case over? Not if prosecutors believe that Sue told the truth the first time.

California domestic violence prosecutions proceed all the time, even with recanting "victims." It's commonly believed that DV victims are prone to false recantations...because they change their mind, they make up with the accused, and they no longer want to see him prosecuted.

Continue reading "Recanting Victims Don't Stop Domestic Violence Prosecutions" »

The Bible tells us that "He who spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is careful to discipline him."(Proverbs 13:24). But in California, adhering to this Scripture can land a parent in jail.

Stated in Penal Code 273d, California child abuse law makes it a crime to "inflict on a child any cruel or inhuman corporal punishment or injury resulting in a traumatic condition." The law defines a "traumatic condition" simply as any visible injury, whether serious or slight.

Unfortunately, Penal Code 273d doesn't give parents a great deal of guidance as to when a justifiable "spanking" or "belting" crosses the line into criminal child abuse. Whipping an 8-year-old for misbehavior may seem proper parenting to one person, but cruel and abusive to another.

This quandary is made all the more difficult by our society's vast differences in cultures, religious beliefs and traditions...all of which influence peoples' views on this topic. Some groups within our society embrace corporal punishment as appropriate and even a moral duty...while others feel that an adult should never be allowed legally to beat a child.

Continue reading "When Does a Spanking Become a Crime?" »

A Santa Ana jury hung yesterday in the murder trial of Sandra Jessee, accused of hiring someone to stab her husband who was ill with colon cancer. The prosecution argued that Jessee was frustrated with the victim's mounting medical bills, and that she gained by inheriting his 401k and life insurance payout.

The jury hung 11-to-1 in favor of the prosecution. Some of the majority jurors accused the dissenting juror of failing to deliberate and analyze the case properly. The dissenter apparently had trouble believing a key prosecution witness, a co-conspirator who had been offered a deal in exchange for his testimony.

Orange County criminal attorney John Murray believes conviction is likely in the retrial. "If they got 11 jurors this time, odds are they'll get 12 next time. But it goes to show that anything's possible in a jury trial, especially when the prosecution has to turn a witness to make its case." Deputy OC District Attorney Mike Murray says he plans to re-file murder charges and retry the case.

Jaime Parades pleaded not guilty today to murder and attempted murder in connection with a July 1st shooting rampage at a Simi Valley Dental Clinic. In the incident, Parades allegedly stormed the clinic, shooting his wife to death and critically injuring three others. He is currently being held without Ventura County bail.

The rampage shocked the relatively peaceful Simi Valley community. According to Ventura criminal defense lawyer Darrel York, public shooting rampages are becoming more common. York attributes this to many factors, including the prevalence of guns on the street, a declining economy, the isolation of people in our metropolitan areas, and America's culture of violence.

Parades faces in excess of 100 years to life in California State Prison. Although the case may go to trial, there's little doubt about his conviction. The prosecution has multiple eyewitnesses and a video taped confession. The Ventura County District Attorney has not yet indicated whether it will seek capital punishment.

Although no charges have been filed yet, the doctors overseeing Michael Jackson could face prosecution--possibly even for murder--if it's determined that they knowingly and improperly administered to him a dangerous combination of drugs.

Dr. Alex Farshchian, a Miami Beach doctor who was treating Michael Jackson at the Neverland Ranch, is currently the focus of an LAPD inquiry. It's suspected that Farshchian was providing Demerol and Buprinex to the singer, both pain killers to which Jackson apparently was addicted.

A person can be charged with Second Degree Murder in California if he intentionally commits an act dangerous to human life, and deliberately acts with a "conscious disregard" for human life. Under Penal Code 187 (California murder law), there need not be any specific intent to kill the victim. Examples include a repeat drunk driver who causes an accident killing a third party, or a drug dealer whose buyer dies from an overdose.

If the Jackson doctors knew that the combination of drugs supplied to the singer was potentially fatal, and outside the bounds of acceptable medical practice, Los Angeles prosecutors could charge them with murder. A conviction carries a life sentence, with the possibility of parole.

According to a NPR report, a recent audit of the Los Angeles Police Department crime labs found that the department had missed legal deadlines to test DNA samples that were collected as evidence in over 200 rape cases. Police Chief Bill Bratton pointed to a lack of funding and manpower in the DNA lab as an explanation for the missed deadlines.

Bratton cited a $500,000 shortfall in federal funding and delays in hiring 16 new lab technicians which strained the crime lab’s ability to process DNA evidence. In the NPR interview, Bratton stated that processing DNA evidence is “extraordinarily labor-intensive…not CSI,” and that “there are just not enough people in the crime lab to do the work.”

That situation is not likely to improve soon. Beginning this year, 2009, the state of California will be required to collect DNA from all adults arrested—not charged—for a felony offense. This is an expansion of existing California law, which mandated the collection of DNA samples from adults arrested—not charged—for California felony sex offenses, murder or manslaughter.

Continue reading "Los Angeles DNA Evidence Backlog: The Perfect Storm" »

Prosecutors thought the father and son who witnessed a California Highway Patrol officer’s murder could be the key to a guilty verdict for suspect Columbus Allen, but credibility issues are calling their testimony into question. The Modesto Bee reports that Christopher Hicks and his son Dujuane both have “credibility issues”; Dujuane faces his own charges of murder in a recent arrest, and Hicks was known to have possessed weapons and drugs in his home.

A discovery dispute is raging between the District Attorney and Allen’s legal defense, who have requested additional information on registration papers held by the defendant at the time of the murder and other documents. The DA is saying that this information has either already been transmitted or is not appropriate for the defense’s review; Allen’s defense team is accusing the DA of withholding vital evidence for its own purposes.

These issues only underscore the importance of having the right witnesses and effectively fighting for appropriate documentation in a criminal defense case. The discovery battle might seem dry and laden with procedural issues, but evidence is at the heart of every criminal case. The right documentation could make or break a defensive strategy, and it’s up to the savvy criminal defense attorney to fight for documents that are being withheld by the District Attorney and other offices with a strategic eye for detail and a “never-give-up” attitude.

The California criminal defense lawyers of Neil Shouse & Associates are experts in discovery issues, witness selection and other fine points of criminal defense. We fight for our clients – and we win. And our track record, resources and experience aren’t our only asset – after all, we offer compassion and exemplary customer service to each and every client. Looking for a criminal defense attorney? Call Neil Shouse & Associates today to find out if our hard-hitting services are right for you.

The Orange County District Attorney’s office has dropped attempted murder charges against an Australian teenager who was accused of trying to smother a 91-year-old patient at a Costa Mesa convalescent home.

According to an article in The Orange County Register, during the Feb. 18 incident, the elderly man, Ted Mastos, woke up to find a stranger smothering him with a pillow. Officials said Drougas got into the facility by gaining entry through an after-hours door used by paramedics and visitors at the 24-hour hospital. Once Mastos knew what was going on he managed to hit an emergency button by his bedside, which got the attention of hospital staff within seconds, the report said.

Continue reading "Attempted Murder Charges Dropped Against Teen In Orange County" »

In a recent and dramatic turn to one of Northern California’s most intriguing murder mysteries, a Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge ordered the release of a jailed murder suspect because prosecutors were taking too long to bring him to trial, according to a news article in the San Jose Mercury News.

In this high-profile, no-body case, Maurice Nasmeh, a 43-year-old architect had been held for 2 1/2 years in Santa Clara County jail having been charged in connection with the disappearance of Jeanine Harms. Prosecutors accused Nasmeh, who was on a date with the 42-year-old Harms on the day of her disappearance, of killing the woman and getting rid of her dead body. The body is believed to have been wrapped in – what has become a piece of key evidence - the rug from Harms’ living room. Prosecutors also say Nasmeh was the last person to see Harms alive on the night of July 27, 2001. Her body has not been found.

Continue reading "South Bay Murder Suspect Freed From Jail After Prosecutors Delay Trial" »

The police investigation in a horrific accident that killed a man in La Mirada recently has culminated in the arrest of 19-year-old Erik Aguirre of La Mirada. According to a news report posted in the Orange County Register’s Web site. Aguirre was held on vehicular manslaughter charges in connection with the death of Liberty Jaswal, 28.

Jaswal was killed in a hit-and-run accident in the parking lot of a La Mirada Del Taco on June 23rd. Sgt. Liza Gonzalez of the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department is quoted in a previous Orange County Register report as stating that a white Chevrolet Astro van, doing approximately 20 mph hit Jaswal, dragged him for a distance of 70 feet and then rolled over him even as Jaswal’s friends who witnessed the accident had run up to the moving van yelling for the driver to stop. However the driver of the van sped up faster as he was urged “Go, go go,” by the passenger, Gonzalez said.

Continue reading "Orange County Hit And Run Case Reaching Conclusion" »

A Santa Rosa boy was charged as an adult in a fatal stabbing incident that occurred Dec. 17 in downtown Petaluma, according to a news article in the Santa Rosa Press Democrat. http://www1.pressdemocrat.com/article/20070703/NEWS/70703002/1033/NEWS01

16-year-old Gibb Olivarez attended the hearing for the first time in adult court Monday but did not enter a plea. A juvenile court judge had ruled last week that given the seriousness of the crimes, Olivarez be treated as an adult in the stabbing and killing of 31-year-old Nathaniel Reifers and causing injuries to 23-year-old Salvatore Cucci Jr., both of Petaluma, the article stated.

Continue reading "Teen Charged As Adult in Petaluma Murder" »