Updated on October 29, 2020
NJ Governor To Sign Law Abolishing Death Penalty
The governor of New Jersey is expected to sign a bill approved by the state legislature to abolish the death penalty. Once signed into law, New Jersey will be the 14 states without capital punishment.
The state has not put anyone to death since 1963. In January 2007, a legislative commission concluded that the death penalty was “inconsistent with evolving standards of decency” and recommended it be abolished.
First Legislative Ban in Decades
This week both the state Assembly and Senate voted in favor of the ban, making New Jersey the first state to legislatively end capital punishment since it was reinstated by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1976.
Governor Jon Corzine, a Democrat, is an opponent of capital punishment and will likely sign the bill into law. In lieu of the death penalty, those convicted of the most serious crimes will receive life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.
Declining Use of Capital Punishment
Thirty-six states, the federal government, and the military still retain the death penalty, though its use is declining. In 2006, executions reached the lowest they’ve been in the past decade, with 53 total. That total is expected to fall even lower this year.
(Source: Reuters)
Facing criminal charges? An experienced defense attorney can help you minimize the negative consequences you may be facing. Contact us today for a free consultation.
Updated on October 29, 2020
19,500 Convicted Crack Offenders Await Commission Decision
Approximately 19,500 federal inmates serving time on crack cocaine-related charges could see a reduction in their sentences if the U.S. Sentencing Commission decides to make recently implemented punishment guidelines of drug possession retroactive.
The commission made new guidelines effective November 1, 2007. The revised guidelines were implemented as part of an attempt to reduce the disparity in punishment between crack cocaine and powder cocaine crimes.
100-to-1 Disparity
In the 1980s, Congress wrote into law harsher penalties for crack offenses. Commonly referred to as the 100-to-1 disparity law, it mandates a five year minimum prison sentence for trafficking in 500 grams of powder cocaine compared to 5 grams of crack.
The law has been criticized as racist because crack is a drug predominantly used by blacks and powder cocaine primarily used by whites. Of the 19,500 inmates who could be affected by the commission’s decision, 86 percent are black.
Supreme Court Decision
On Monday, the Supreme Court upheld the right of judges to impose more lenient sentences for crack cocaine offenses than those outlined by the sentencing commission. The high court ruling could affect the outcome of today’s commission meeting.
In recent years, the seven-member commission has revised the sentencing guidelines, making the penalties less harsh, for drug crimes involving LSD, marijuana, and Oxycontin. Those drugs are largely used by whites, and the commission’s decision was made retroactive.
(Source: Associated Press)
Charged with a drug crime? An experienced criminal defense attorney can help you. Contact us today to arrange a FREE consultation.
Updated on October 29, 2020
Nation’s Busiest Crime Lab Reviewed after Mistakes
A New York state official has asked the district attorney of Queens to consider criminal charges against four former employees of the New York Police Department’s crime lab because of mistakes made in 2002 that could have skewed evidence in drug cases.
“The integrity of evidence is a cornerstone of law enforcement. These lapses were a threat not only to the prosecution of drug crimes but to the public’s trust in our criminal justice system,” said Kristine Hamann, the state inspector general.
Appeals Expected
Prosecutors use drug evidence collected during raids and seizures to secure a conviction, and the amount or weight of drug found has a bearing on the severity of sentencing.
Criminal defense attorney and co-founder of the Innocence Project, Peter Neufeld, said the findings “undermine God knows how many convictions,” and legal experts said the review could prompt appeals by those who want their sentences reevaluated or their convictions overturned.
Incompetent Lab Analysts
The police department acknowledged the sloppy work by three of the lab’s analysts, all of whom were either transferred or dismissed when they failed lab accuracy tests five years ago. The lab has since been overhauled with new staff and procedures.
However, the lab failed to disclose the drug testing errors to state officials until 2007 and also failed to report the mistakes to the Laboratory Accreditation Board of the American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors.
According to Hamann, much of the original evidence has been destroyed or tainted in the five-year lapse, making new testing extremely difficult. She added that it is also now impossible to know if any other of the lab’s 100 analysts took shortcuts during the tedious drug testing process.
In addition to the three former analysts, Hamann has recommended that the former director, W. Mark Dale, of the lab also be charged. Dale retired in 2004.
(Source: The New York Times online)
Charged with drug possession? Contact us today to arrange a free consultation with an experienced attorney who can ensure your rights are protected.
Updated on October 29, 2020
Nonviolent Felons Must Submit DNA
Collecting DNA samples from nonviolent drug offenders is not a violation of privacy rights, a federal court of appeals ruled late last week. A panel of three judges decided the case in a 2-1 vote.
Dissenting Judge Betty Fletcher said the ruling “approves, without flinching, a statute that affects a far broader and far less justified erosion of the Fourth Amendment.”
The Case
The decision was made in the case of Thomas Kriesel, who refused to submit a DNA sample after he was released from prison.
Kriesel was charged with possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute and sentenced to two years in prison plus three years of supervised release. He is still on supervised release but has been working and law-abiding, according to attorney Colin Fieman.
The Law
In 2000, a federal law was enacted requiring all violent felons to submit a DNA sample to be held in a national database. Several years later in 2004, that law was broadened to include nonviolent felons as well.
Judge M. Margaret McKeown, who wrote the panel’s majority opinion, said the “diminished privacy interests” of convicted felons are now outweighed by the government’s interest in effective law enforcement.
Fletcher did not deny the potential benefits of DNA collection, but she added that the law “requires constitutional means, not just effective ends.”
Fieman said he plans to seek another hearing, this time before the entire appeals court panel.
“We’re just hopeful we’ll get further review because it is an important issue,” he said.
(Source: Associated Press)
Charged with a crime? Discuss your legal options with an experienced criminal defense attorney. Contact us today.
Updated on October 29, 2020
Seized Marijuana To Be Returned to Man, Court Rules
A California police department must return marijuana seized during a routine traffic stop, a state appeals court ruled earlier this week. According to the ruling, federal drug laws cannot supersede state laws in a drug possession case.
Man Cited for Possession
In 2005, Garden Grove police officers pulled over Felix Kha for running a stop sign. When Kha was asked if he had any illegal substances in his possession, he admitted to having a quarter of an ounce of prescription marijuana.
Marijuana is banned under federal law, but possession of the drug is legal in California with a valid prescription. However, the police seized the drug and cited Kha for a traffic violation and possession of marijuana.
Judge Orders Marijuana Returned
Kha pleaded guilty to the traffic violation and submitted proof of his prescription for the drug. The judge granted him permission to retrieve the marijuana, but the police refused to return it.
“He had to go to court three times to get this order. When the police have no probable cause to believe that people are violating the law, they shouldn’t be seizing their medical marijuana or citing them,” said Joe Elford, attorney for Kha.
The Garden Grove police appealed the case, but a three-judge panel supported the original order to return the marijuana.
(Source: The New York Times online)
Charged with illegal possession of marijuana? Contact us today to start planning your legal defense.
Updated on October 29, 2020
CA Sex Offender Law Not Practical
A California law requiring sex offenders to be strapped with a satellite tracking device is not practical, law enforcement officials are now realizing. Funding the surveillance program is among the biggest problems with the law.
“I don’t know of any agency that has the resources to track and monitor…in real time. You’ll need an air traffic controller to track these folks,” said Richard Word, chief of Vacaville Police and president of the California Police Chiefs Association.
Estimated Cost
According to estimates by corrections analysts, the program would cost the state approximately $90 million annually just to track the 9,000 sex offenders currently on parole in the state.
That number is expected to grow in coming years, especially because the law—also known as Proposition 83 or Jessica’s Law—would require even those sex offenders who have completed parole to be equipped with a global positioning device.
Who Should Pay?
Now law enforcement leaders and others who supported the widely endorsed measure, including Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, are battling over who should foot the bill for the program.
Officials have been testifying before the state’s Sex Offender Management Board for a report expected in January. The report will discuss the practicality of the law and what changes may be necessary for its implementation.
“We’ve heard significant concerns with how monitoring would be implemented and how it would be paid for,” said Suzanne Brown-McBride, chair of the board.
(Source: Los Angeles Times online)
Charged with a sex crime? You need an experienced attorney to help you start planning your defense. Contact us to schedule a consultation with a defense attorney near you.
Updated on October 29, 2020
Rape Charges Filed Against Boys Under 10
Three boys under the age of 10 are facing charges of rape and kidnapping in Georgia after the mother of an 11-year-old girl filed a police report on Sunday. The boys are currently being held at a detention center, authorities said.
The Allegations
According to the allegations, the girl was assaulted near an apartment complex in the Atlanta suburb of Acworth. The boys charged in the case are 8 and 9 years old. Police in said they have never investigated rape allegations against parties this young before.
“The victim said they were playing outdoors and the girl was forced into a wooded area where she was sexually assaulted, where one of the boys raped her,” said Acworth police Captain Wayne Dennard.
Too Young for Felony Charges
Felony charges cannot be filed against the boys because of their age, said Cobb County District Attorney Pat Head. However, Head said they could be tried on delinquent charges that carry up to five years in a juvenile facility.
(Source: The Associated Press)
Has your child been charged with a crime? Contact an experienced criminal defense attorney today to learn more about his/her legal options.
Updated on October 29, 2020
Police Shooting Revives Debate Over Use of Lethal Force
The killing of a teenager in New York last week has renewed an old and controversial debate about police corruption and the use of lethal force. Twenty shots were fired at the teen when police mistook a hairbrush for a gun.
Excessive Force?
Khiel Coppin, a mentally ill 18-year-old, was heard saying he had a gun in the background of an emergency call. In a second emergency call, Coppin’s mother said he did not have a gun. She repeated this to the officers after they arrived.
Outside the home, Coppin, who held a black brush in his hand, approached the officers. Police opened fire when Coppin ignored their orders to stop.
“Why did the police not heed the warnings … that her son was unarmed? Why was it necessary for the overwhelming use of deadly force? Five police officers, twenty shots, eight hits. Is there no proportionality?” asked Paul Wooten, attorney for Coppin’s family.
Not a Singular Incident
The killing is just one of several to make headlines in recent years. In 2006, police officers in New York fired 50 shots at Sean Bell and his two friends. The three were driving in a car, unarmed. It was Bell’s wedding day. He was killed and his two friends were seriously wounded.
West African immigrant Amadou Diallo, 22, was killed in 1999 after four undercover officers opened fire. Diallo was standing in an apartment vestibule reaching for his wallet. Police said they thought he was reaching for a gun. They fired 41 shots, 19 of which struck Diallo.
A similar incident in Cincinnati in 2001 sparked a level of civil unrest the city hadn’t seen since Martin Luther King Jr.’s assassination. Police shot and killed Timothy Thomas during a chase when Thomas reached down to pull up his pants. He was unarmed.
Racial Stereotypes a Factor?
In the past, police have been criticized for falling prey to racial stereotypes when it comes to the use of deadly force. Some studies have shown that officers use greater force on nonwhite suspects than on white suspects. All of the police shooting victims above—
Coppin, Bell, Diallo, and Thomas—were black.
“Just because a subject has something unidentifiable in his or her hands, that’s never an automatic justification for the use of deadly force,” said Cincinnati attorney Scott Greenwood.
(Source: Associated Press)
Charged with a crime? An experienced criminal law attorney can help you plan your defense. Contact us today to arrange a free consultation with an experienced attorney.
Updated on October 29, 2020
Plan to introduce Eye Scan for Sex Offenders
The Alameda County Sheriff’s Office is reportedly becoming the first public agency in the Bay Area to force sex offenders to submit iris scanning.
Many anticipate that this new strategy will jump-start debate regarding how police officials should be using this powerful technology.
Seeing Through a Criminal’s Eye
The human iris has a unique texture that can be used as a map in a searchable database.
Proponents of the technology claim that although it won’t replace fingerprinting, it offers a speedier and more accurate way to detect criminals.
However, unlike fingerprints, criminals don’t leave their irises at the scene of a crime, so many believe that this technology could prove to be less effective than police anticipate.
“We’re at the infancy of this whole thing,” admits Sgt. J.D. Nelson, the spokesman for the sheriff’s department.
Invasion of Privacy?
Stuart Hanlon, a San Francisco defense attorney, said he was concerned about the iris scanners and their invasion on people’s privacy.
“I don’t know why police would start this without some legislation to back it up,” said Hanlon.
According to Robert Melley, the chief operating officer of a company who manufactures the scanners, “An officer will eventually be able to have a hand-held iris recognition scanner on his or her belt, and as part of a routine to stop traffic, he or she could simply ask the driver and passengers to look into this camera.”
Cristina Arguedas, a defense attorney in Berkeley says that she is skeptical of this new system.
“That sounds like an invasion of privacy to me, certainly to the passengers and to anyone who didn’t do anything wrong.”
(Source: SFGate)
Have you been wrongfully accused of a sex crime? If so, contact one of our experienced criminal law lawyers today to get a FREE evaluation and to protect your rights.
Updated on October 29, 2020
Officials in South Carolina Fight over Parole
At the same time, the attorney general in South Carolina is pushing for an end to parole, the state’s prisons director is opposing an action he says will crowd the prison system and cost the state hundreds of millions in building expenses.
Current Law & the Push to Abolish Parole
Currently, a state parole board can reduce an inmate’s sentence by 15 percent for certain felony crimes. Parole for the most serious violent crimes and drug offenses was abolished in 1995.
Now S.C. Attorney General Henry McMaster wants to abolish parole altogether, claiming that such a move will give people confidence that convicted criminals will complete the sentences they’ve been given.
“People need to be able to mark their calendars in the courtroom and know the earliest date that defendant can be released,” McMaster said.
Prison Director Pushes in Opposite Direction
According to prisons director Jon Ozmint, eliminating parole would further strain the state’s overburdened prisons, jeopardize the safety of prison employees, and spark a costly “building spree” of new prisons.
“In any state that abolishes parole, the inmate population will grow. South Carolina is no different,” he said.
Ozmint is, therefore, pushing for a more liberal parole and has asked a Senate-appointed Criminal Justice Task Force to create reforms that would:
- more clearly distinguish between non-violent and violent crimes
- free up prison beds currently unavailable because of outdated drug laws
- permit parole for inmates who have served 70 percent of their original sentence
Senator Gerald Malloy chaired the special task force and said that the public “generally agrees, on the surface, (that) a person needs to know how much time they are getting.” He added, however, that “the issue of (no) parole would be a great cost to the system.”
(Source: The State online)
Accused of a parole violation? Contact an experienced criminal defense attorney today for a complimentary consultation to discuss your options.
