Everything You Wanted to Know But Were Afraid to Ask: "Lewd Conduct in Public" Edition

I've previously written here about section 647 of the California Penal Code.  Commonly referred to as "Disorderly Conduct", PC 647 prohibits everything from prostitution to peeping, loitering, sleeping in parks and being drunk in public.  Subsection (a), though, is the topic of today's post.

PC 647(a) makes it a misdemeanor to engage in any "lewd or dissolute conduct" in any public place or in any place that is exposed to public view.  To be convicted of this offense, the prosecutor must establish 5 elements:

• That the defendant willfully touched his or her own genitals, buttocks or female breasts (or the genitals, buttocks or female breasts of another person),
• That the defendant acted with the intent to arouse or gratify him / herself or another person, or to annoy or offend another person, 
• The defendant was in a public place or a place that was open to public view, 
• Someone else who might have been offended was present, AND
• The defendant knew or should have known that another person who might be offended was present. 

That's a lot of unpack, and a lot of elements that may be open to some interpretation and argument.  Put simply though, the DA must prove that the defendant was doing something sexual in public view with the knowledge that he could be seen by someone who might not want to see whatever the defendant was doing.

It's interesting to note that breasts are only considered "lewd" on women.  If a man rubs his own bare nipples (or if someone else rubs a man's nipples) in public, there's no crime.  

In my previous post re: Drunk in Public cases, I explained that the legal definition of "public place" includes any place that is generally open and accessible to members of the public. This includes inside private businesses, on roads, in parking spaces, and even your own front porch.  Since it wouldn't be considered "trespassing" for a salesman to walk up your driveway and knock on your door, those spaces are considered "public places" for the purposes of PC 647.  The same is true for common hallways and courtyards in apartment buildings.  

The next two elements are where a lot of people get tripped up.  To constitute the crime of 647(a), the DA must prove that another person who might have been offended was present.  They do not have to prove that the onlooker was, in fact, offended.  The prosecutor must also prove that the defendant knew or should have known about the onlooker's presence, but they do not have to prove that the defendant intended to be seen.  

Even though PC 647(a) is a non-violent misdemeanor, it may carry heavy penalties, including jail time, probation, mandatory counseling, stay-away orders, fines and community service.  

There are many possible defenses to the charge of 647(a).  The best strategy in your particular case, though, will depend on the unique facts and circumstances surrounding your arrest. 

If you or a loved one has questions about PC 647(a) in California, call us for a free attorney consultation. (714) 449-3335. Ask for John. 

Thanks for reading. 

Fullerton Criminal Defense Attorney

Can I Be Arrested for Being "Drunk in Public" on Private Property?

Section 647(f) of the California Penal Code makes it a misdemeanor to appear in a "public place" while under the influence of alcohol or drugs.

In "drunk in public" cases, the question often arises over what technically constitutes a "public place".  There is a common myth that "drunk in public" laws are unenforceable inside bars because bars are private property.  This is false.

Under California law, a "public place" is defined as any place that is generally open and accessible to anyone who wishes to go there.  This includes private businesses that invite members of the public onto their premises.  Bars are considered to be "public places" in California.

Since roads, highways, and even parking spaces are open and accessible to the public, California courts have ruled that they also qualify as "public places" for the purposes of PC 647(f).  This means that you can be arrested for being drunk in public if you are found intoxicated inside a vehicle while the car is in a public place (on the road or parked somewhere publicly).

In some states, you can be arrested for being intoxicated in a place that is visible to the public.  In California, though, it is not necessarily illegal to be under the influence of alcohol while exposed to public view.  It is perfectly legal for adults to get inebriated inside their own homes in California, regardless of whether or not they are visible to neighbors.

The front lawn of a private residence, however, is a different story.  In the landmark case of People v. Olson (1971) 18 Cal.App.3. 594, a California appellate court ruled that the area between the street and the front door of a private residence (including the lawn and porch) are considered to be "public places" for the purposes of PC 647(f).  Since it would not be considered "trespassing" for a stranger (e.g. a salesman, a Girl Scout, a mail carrier, etc.) to approach the front door of a private home, that area is considered to be "open and accessible", and therefore "public".  This means you can be arrested for being "drunk in public" on your own front lawn.  The same is true for common hallways and courtyards of apartment buildings -- if those areas are generally open to members of the public who may pass through while conducting lawful business, then they are considered to be "public places".

In my view, there are still some unanswered questions here.  What if, for example, your front lawn is enclosed with a white picket fence?  Is that still considered "open and accessible"?  What if you have a "No Trespassing / No Solicitors" sign posted?  How about a super exclusive, members-only bar?  Or a Masonic Lodge?  Are these places "open to the public"?  I could see arguments going both ways.

There are many possible defenses to PC 647(f) charges in California.  The best strategy in your particular case will depend on the unique facts and circumstances.  Our office has extensive experience in fighting "drunk in public" charges throughout Southern California.

If you or a loved one has questions about a "drunk in public" case in California, call us for a free attorney consultation.  (714) 449-3335.  Ask for John.

Thanks for reading.

Fullerton Criminal Defense Lawyer

Seal Your California Arrest Records

There's a new procedure in California to seal your arrest records.  This new law will be a huge benefit to anyone who has been arrested but not convicted for a crime.

This is not the same as an expungement.  As I've previously written on this blog, an expungement in California does not completely hide the fact that your case ever happened.  Instead, it simply changes your criminal history report so that your old conviction shows up as a dismissed case.  Expungements are helpful for people who were once convicted of a crime, but later complied with probation and remained law-abiding.  Once an expungement is granted, you can honestly state on most job applications that you have never been convicted of a crime.

The procedure I want to discuss today is a little different.  This new law, PC 851.91, is specifically intended to help people who were arrested but NOT convicted of any crime (i.e., the DA declined to file charges, the case was dismissed, or the petitioner was acquitted by a jury).

Until now, a petitioner who wanted to seal his arrest record had the burden of proving that he was "factually innocent" of the charges for which he was arrested.  That can be nearly impossible.  Being factually innocent is not the same as being "not guilty".  Remember, to be convicted of a crime, the DA must prove the defendant guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt".  That's pretty high burden.  The law doesn't define "beyond a reasonable doubt" in terms of a percentage, but most law school professors will tell you that it is probably the equivalent of being 98-99% sure of the defendant's guilt.  In some cases, though, the DA might only be able to prove that the defendant is "probably" guilty (let's say, 60-75% sure).  In those cases, the DA has failed to carry the burden of proof and the defendant is not guilty.  That doesn't necessarily mean that he's "factually innocent", it only means that the DA could not prove the defendant's guilt with enough confidence to sustain a conviction.  Under the old rule, a defendant who had beaten a criminal case and wanted to seal his arrest record basically had the burden of proving himself innocent (0% guilty), and that was extremely difficult.  As a result, a lot of people were stuck in a weird, gray area -- they had never been convicted of a crime, but they still had an embarrassing arrest record.

Under the new rule, though, you no longer need to prove yourself "factually innocent" to seal your arrest record.  Now, you only have to show that the arrest did not result in a conviction.  If you were arrested and the DA declined to file charges, charges were dismissed, or you were acquitted by a jury, our office can help you ensure that your embarrassing arrest records and police reports are never released to the public.

Even if you were never charged or convicted for any crime, an arrest record can make your life difficult.  When you apply for a job and your prospective employer runs a background check, they are going to see an arrest with no disposition.  They are going to have questions about the case -- were you convicted?  Were you acquitted?  Did you participate in some diversion program?  Good luck getting a job with those records following you around.  The same problem arises when you try to purchase a firearm and your record shows an arrest for some disqualifying offense, like domestic violence or assault.  Plus, it's just embarrassing.  Getting arrested was probably one of the worst nights of your life.  There's no reason that experience needs to be rehashed every time you submit to a background check.  

There are a lot of criteria that you have to satisfy before you're eligible to seal your arrest records, and the process is a little complicated, but we can help.   If you or a loved one has questions about sealing your record in California, call us for a free attorney consultation. 714 449 3335. Ask for John.

Seal Arrest Records in Fullerton

What to Do if You've Been Served With a Restraining Order

If you've been served with a restraining order, you must immediately begin the process of preparing your defense.  That process should start by consulting with a qualified, local attorney to discuss your options and to coordinate your strategy.  A competent attorney will understand the types of arguments that are likely to be effective, and how to present admissible evidence to support your position.

If you possess firearms, you must surrender them to the local police or to a licensed gun dealer within 48 hours.  You may not simply sell them to a friend or ask a family member to hold them for you.  The police or the gun dealer will prepare some paperwork that you must file with the court.  Before your hearing, the judge will confirm that any firearms registered in your name have been accounted for.

Most importantly, though, you must resist the impulse to make matters worse.  Do not contact the petitioner in any way.  Do not ask someone else to contact the petitioner or to pass along a message on your behalf.  Do not try to "fix" the situation yourself by apologizing or by attempting to "smooth things out".  Remember, a temporary restraining order IS a restraining order.  If you violate it, you will be arrested and prosecuted.  Your violation will also be used against you at your hearing.  If the judge finds that you have violated the temporary order, he or she will almost certainly grant a permanent restraining order against you, even if the original petition was weak or deficient.  As the court sees it, your violation of the temporary order demonstrates that you are impulsive, you don't respect the law, and you are probably dangerous.

Even if the petitioner attempts to contact you while the temporary restraining order is in effect, you may not respond.  This seems unfair, and it is, but remember that the temporary restraining order prohibits you from contacting the petitioner, not vice versa.  If a judge has ordered you not to contact the petitioner, the petitioner cannot simply grant you permission to disobey the judge.

If you have some valid reason why you NEED to contact the petitioner before your hearing (e.g. you need to pick up your medication from her house, etc.), or you want to negotiate a dismissal outside of court, that communication must be done through your attorney.  Your lawyer is the ONLY person who may contact the petitioner or pass along messages to her on your behalf.

If you or a loved one has been served with a temporary restraining order in Southern California, call us for a free attorney consultation. 714 449 3335. Ask for John.

Thanks for reading.

Orange County Restraining Order Lawyer

How to Fight a Restraining Order When the Facts are BAD

I've previously written on this blog about the process of getting or fighting a restraining order in California.  If you haven't already, take a moment to read some of the basics here.  In these introductory articles, I explain the legal procedures and the issues you should be prepared to discuss at your hearing.

I've also previously written on this blog about a common situation -- fighting a restraining order when the petitioner is crazy.  Defending yourself against a crazy person requires a special strategy, and that's not the focus of this article.

Today's post is specifically about fighting a restraining order when the facts against you are BAD.  Maybe you've said or done things that you're not proud of, and maybe the petitioner has proof (emails, text messages, surveillance videos, reliable witnesses, etc.).  Even if you've behaved badly, and even if we all agree on what happened, it's not necessarily a slam dunk that the petitioner will walk out of court with a restraining order in hand.  There are several effective strategies for fighting restraining orders, even if the facts appear bad at first glance.

There are situations where it may be futile to deny your bad behavior.  If the petitioner has reliable proof, you will harm your own case by disingenuously trying to deny the facts.  You will look like a liar, you will lose your credibility, and you will lose your case.  Of course, that's not to say that you should admit to things you haven't done or confess when the evidence is weak.  I'm speaking specifically about situations where you behaved badly and the petitioner can prove it.

Bad facts must be justified, excused or explained.  A justification is a defense where you essentially argue that you did the RIGHT thing under the circumstances.  Your behavior might have been illegal or improper in other situations, but perfectly proper in that particular place and time.  "Self defense" or "defense of others" are common justifications.  In most situations, for example, it is illegal to threaten someone with a weapon.  If you threaten your neighbor with a bat to make him stop beating his wife, though, you've done a GOOD thing.  If your neighbor then files a restraining order against you for threatening him with a bat, you should admit that you engaged in that conduct (you DID threaten him with a bat), and you should explain to the judge why your actions were justified under the circumstances.

If you can't justify your actions, maybe you can excuse them. An excuse is a defense where you acknowledge that your behavior wasn't "good", but you argue that you don't deserve to accept the blame.  If, for example, you were involuntarily drugged, you might not deserve to be punished for your behavior while you were under the influence.

If your behavior can't be justified or excused, maybe it can at least be explained.  An explanation is a defense where you admit that you did the wrong thing, but you argue that your blame is mitigated or reduced under the circumstances.  For example, maybe you were provoked with offensive insults and you responded with violence.  We don't agree that your violent reaction was appropriate, but maybe we understand why you reacted the way you did.  Your outburst was out-of-character and it won't happen again.

That last part is important -- it won't happen again.  As I've previously explained on this blog, a restraining order is an "injunction".  An injunction is a court order that is intended to prevent some future harm that has not yet happened, not to punish you for some past wrongdoing.  This is tricky.  The issue that the judge must decide at the restraining order hearing is: has the petitioner proven that the respondent has harassed him or her?  Sometimes -- and this is risky -- we must acknowledge that the respondent has committed some act of violence, threats or harassment against the petitioner, but we establish that the harm is not likely to reoccur in the future.  Since we're talking about an injunction and not a criminal violation, the analysis doesn't stop with, "did this happen?".  A restraining order is not appropriate unless the harm is likely to happen in the future.  If the harm has already passed and is not likely to happen again, then a restraining order is not appropriate.  There is valid case law to support this defense, but the proper citations and legal argument must be presented effectively by an experienced, competent lawyer.  Don't try this at home.

If you or a loved one has questions about a restraining order in California, call us for a free attorney consultation.  (714) 449-3335.  Ask for John.

Thanks for reading.

Orange County Restraining Order Lawyer

What We're Working On Now

It's been a busy couple of months here in the office, and I realize that I haven't posted any updates about some of our recent success stories.  If you've been anxiously holding your breath, good news!  Here's a quick rundown of some of the great cases that we've been working on:

• Driving Without a License / False Info to a Police Officer -- Rancho Cucamonga (San Bernardino County):  Our client had been stopped several years ago for driving without a valid license.  To make matters worse, he gave a false name to the officer.  A month later, police discovered that the name was incorrect and our client was accused of 2 separate misdemeanors. Our client failed to appear in court and he had 2 outstanding warrants for several years. Eventually, the warrants caught up to him and he was going to lose his job. This morning, I met with the DA and they agreed to dismiss both matters entirely. Our client can finally get back to work without being afraid that police would show up at any minute and take him into custody on some ticky tacky old warrants. Greats news for him and his family. 
• Elder Abuse Restraining Order -- Santa Ana (Orange County):  Our client was an elderly man who had been the victim of harassment and financial abuse by his adult daughter. He was seeking a restraining order against her to keep her away from his home and bank accounts. We were able to negotiate an out-of-court stipulation to help both parties achieve what they wanted without going to a full hearing before a judge. As I've written on this blog in the past, stipulations can be a great way for parties to negotiate their disputes in restraining order matters without involving taxpayers and judges. Out-of-court negotiations often allow both parties to achieve 100% of their goals without the risk that a judge will impose some "solution" where neither party is satisfied. 
• Attempted Rape --  Fullerton (Orange County):  Our client is a young alcoholic. He was extremely intoxicated and acting belligerently, including some aggressive behavior toward a female stranger. We all agreed that his behavior was inappropriate, but I did not believe that he intended or attempted to "rape" anyone. After a thorough investigation, the District Attorney agreed that my client was not guilty of attempted rape. He was potentially facing several years in prison, followed by lifetime sex offender registration. Instead, he received the appropriate resolution: mandatory alcohol counseling and NO sex offender registration.  
• Trespassing / Theft -- Fullerton (Orange County):  Our client was a "porch pirate". She was actually captured on camera stealing packages from the victim's doorstep. Package theft is rampant in North Orange County, so police and prosecutors are often eager to make an example when offenders are caught red-handed. Luckily, our client was sympathetic and apologetic. She had no serious criminal history. Most importantly, she had a great defense attorney! In the end, she agreed to a "diversion deal" -- she took a 6-hour class one Saturday and the DA agreed to dismiss the case entirely.  
• Child Abuse -- West Covina (Los Angeles County):  Our client was accused of abusing her boyfriend's child. My client insisted that she had merely used some reasonable methods of discipline to correct behavior in an obstinate child. The defendant was a tough disciplinarian, but I did not believe that the punishments she imposed on the child were excessive or unwarranted. After some further investigation, the DA agreed to dismiss the charges.

These are just a few of the cases where we've recently achieved some great results for our clients. Obviously, the facts of every case are different, so these success stories are not guarantees or predictions of future performance.  

I have a lot more interesting cases that I'll be free to discuss soon. Check back for updates as they become available.  

If you or a loved one is accused of a crime in Orange County, call us for a free attorney consultation. (714) 449-3335. 

Fullerton Criminal Defense Attorney

What is the Statute of Limitations for Sex Crimes in California?

The "statute of limitations" ("SoL") describes the time limit within which prosecutors must bring criminal charges.  If the DA waits too long before filing a case, they may be "time barred" from doing so.  Like everything else in the law, though, this is often more complicated than it sounds.

Before we get started, it's important to remember that the "statute of limitations" refers to the time within which the case must be filed.  Often, prosecutors do file a case within the proscribed time period, but the defendant never appears in court for his arraignment.  When this happens, a bench warrant is issued.  The warrant may remain outstanding forever, or until the defendant is eventually arrested and brought to court.  A warrant will never simply go away on its own.  If an old warrant has been outstanding for several years, the defendant may have a valid argument that his constitutional right to a speedy trial has been violated, but this is different from a "statute of limitations" argument if the case was filed before the SoL expired.

The length of the statute of limitations depends on the maximum sentence for the specific underlying crime.  For most misdemeanors, the SoL is one  year.  That means prosecutors have one year from the date that the crime was discovered (not necessarily the date that the crime was committed) to file charges.  If the crime is a "wobbler" (one that can be filed as either a misdemeanor or a felony at the discretion of the DA), then a longer statute of limitations may apply, even if the case is only filed as a misdemeanor.

If the crime is a felony and the maximum penalty is less than 8 years in prison, the statute of limitations is usually 3 years.  If the maximum sentence is more than 8 years in prison, then the SoL is usually 6 years.  If the crime is potentially punishable by death or by life in prison, or if the crime involves embezzlement of public money, then there is no statute of limitations -- the DA can file charges at any time.

There are many, many exceptions and caveats to the rule that prosecutions must generally commence with within the 1-, 3- or 6-year statute of limitations.  If, for example, a defendant is out of the state when the crime is committed, the SoL can be extended by up to 3 additional years.

Arguments about the statute of limitations get especially complicated in cases involving allegations of child molestation, or "lewd acts with a minor" (PC 288).  Under section 803(f) of the California Penal Code, the SoL may be extended even longer under certain circumstances. The  district attorney can file criminal charges at any time (for up to one year after a report is made) if ALL of the following criteria are met:

• The crime involved child rape, oral copulation, penetration, or other "substantial sexual conduct" with a minor (the victim was under 18 at the time),
• The crime had never been previously reported to police, AND
• There is some independent evidence to support the allegations.  If the victim is over 21 at the time that the crime is reported, that "independent evidence" must be "clear and convincing".

The argument in these cases tends to revolve around the 3rd prong -- that the allegation be supported by "independent evidence" that is "clear and convincing".  Appellate courts have dealt with these issues extensively, and the nuances are intricate.

As I warned in the opening paragraph, issues regarding the statute of limitations can get complicated.  You may have a valid defense based on a filing delay, but the argument must be properly presented and supported by up-to-date citations or it will not be effective.

If you or a loved one is fighting an old sex case, call us for a free attorney consultation. 714 449 3335.  Ask for John. 

Thanks for reading.

Fullerton Criminal Defense Attorney

What are the Rules About Marijuana and Driving in California?

Section 23152 of the California Vehicle Code says that driving under the influence of drugs and / or alcohol is a misdemeanor.  Everyone knows that legal limit for alcohol is 0.08% -- if prosecutors can prove that your blood alcohol concentration was greater than 0.08% at the time of driving, you are guilty of DUI.

Marijuana is a lot more complicated than alcohol, though.  Even though adults over 21 may now legally grow, use and possess marijuana in California, it is still illegal to operate any motor vehicle (a car, a boat, a golf cart, a jet ski, a moped...anything with a motor) while you are "impaired" by cannabis.

Unlike alcohol, there is no magic number to objectively determine whether or not someone is too stoned to legally drive.  To convict you of driving under the influence of marijuana, the prosecutor must prove that you operated a vehicle while you were in such a condition that you could not exercise the skill and care of an ordinary, sober driver (whatever that means).

If you are stopped by police and an officer suspects that you've been smoking, he will begin the standard investigative procedures: he will ask you a series of questions about where you're coming from and where you're going.  He'll ask if you're under the care of a doctor of if you've had any recent surgeries.  He'll ask when you slept last and whether or not there is anything mechanically wrong with your car.  The officer also will probably invite you to participate in a series of field sobriety tests (walk a line, touch your nose, stand on one foot, estimate 30 seconds, etc.).  You are not legally required to take these tests.  You'll be arrested either way, so I'd advise that you provide as little evidence as possible to be used against you later in court.  If you are stopped on suspicion of DUI, you should POLITELY decline to play the roadside Olympics.  You should also avoid talking yourself into trouble.  Do not admit that you recently smoked, drank, or consumed any controlled substance. 

After you are arrested, you must provide a blood sample.  If you refuse to submit to a chemical test after you have been lawfully arrested on suspicion of DUI, the DMV will automatically suspend your driver's license for one year. 

To make their case against you in court, the DA will introduce evidence that were driving poorly before you were pulled over.  A police officer will testify that he stopped you because you were driving too slowly, you were drifting within your lane, you made an unsafe lane change, etc.  The officer will testify that you "appeared disoriented" and "had difficulty following instructions".  He will probably also testify about the smell of burnt cannabis emitted from your breath and from the interior of your vehicle.  If you agreed to perform field sobriety tests, the officer will testify that you failed them all miserably, even if you feel like you nailed them.  Based on the totality of his observations, the officer will testify, he formed the opinion that you were dangerously impaired by marijuana and that you could not safely operate a vehicle.

The DA will also use your blood test results to build their case against you.  Your blood test will give two important numbers: your levels THC metabolites (also called "carboxy-THC", or "COOH-THC"), and your levels of active THC (also called "delta-9-THC").  THC metabolites remain in your blood system for weeks after your last usage.  They are not psychoactive and are not indicative of current impairment.  They only prove that you have consumed marijuana some time within the past several weeks.  This number is not relevant to determining whether or not you were dangerously impaired at the time of driving, but it may be relevant to demonstrate that you have a high tolerance for the drug.

Your delta-9-THC numbers are slightly more valuable in determining your current level of impairment.  Delta-9-THC is the chemical that is CURRENTLY active in your bloodstream.  Your delta-9-THC concentration is still not a completely reliable way to determine a driver's degree of impairment, though.  Since cannabis affects users so differently, there is not a strong correlation between a person's delta-9-THC levels and his or her actual impairment.  A relatively inexperienced marijuana user might be very impaired at a low THC level, where a more experienced smoker might barely feel any effect at the high blood-THC concentration.  Consider also that indica-dominant strains might affect a user differently than sativa-dominant strains, and that standard field sobriety tests are designed to detect alcohol impairment, not cannabis impairment.  Most "experts" will testify that a driver is more likely to be involved in a collision when his or her active THC level is greater than 5 ng/ml, and that the risk is multiplied by the presence of alcohol, but this is controversial.

Police and prosecutors are aggressively working to crack down on "drugged driving", including driving under the influence of legal drugs (marijuana, prescription drugs, sleep aids, etc.).  The Orange County District Attorney's Office has several deputy prosecutors who are specially trained and specifically assigned to process DUID cases full-time.  They take these cases seriously, but that doesn't mean that they have the advantage.  In my experience, their aggressive policy often means that they choose to pursue cases even when the evidence is weak. 

If you or a loved one has questions about DUI or driving under the influence of drugs in Southern California, call us for a free attorney consultation. (714) 449-3335. Ask for John.

Thanks for reading.

Fullerton DUI Lawyer

Religious Use of Marijuana

There is a pervasive and persistent myth that, somehow, claiming "religious use" is a valid, legal defense to the charge of operating an unlicensed marijuana dispensary.  It is not.

It's frustrating to see decent people taking bad advice and getting themselves arrested.  It's especially frustrating in a place like California, where marijuana is legal.  California currently allows adults to cultivate and possess marijuana for recreational or medical use.  If you follow some simple rules, you can even sell it.  Unfortunately, some shady attorneys, charlatans and various non-attorney posers have been spreading the myth that "rules don't apply to you if you simply pretend that it's your religion."  This is, of course, total nonsense.  As a real attorney, I would strongly discourage anyone from relying on this argument.

Just think about it.  If anyone could successfully disregard the law by simply claiming that XYZ was part of their "religion", what would stop them from founding the Church of Child Pornography?  Or the Church of Bank Robbery?  

Most of the confusion revolves around a pair of federal laws -- the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the Religious Land Use and Incarcerated Persons Act.  These laws prohibit the federal government from taking any action that "substantially burdens" the free exercise of religion unless authorities can show some compelling interest in doing so.  The RLUIPA further prohibits local authorities from imposing land use restrictions that interfere with the free exercise of religion.  Some advocates have argued that, taken together, these federal laws provide carte blanche to ignore local zoning laws regarding commercial marijuana activity as long as they call their dispensary a "church".

Courts have consistently shot these arguments down.  Instead, they have affirmed the power of local zoning authorities to regulate commercial marijuana activity, regardless of whether or not litigants claim that cannabis is a "sacrament".  Their reasoning has turned on a couple key points.  Keep in the mind that no court has ever ruled that religion is an absolute defense to anything.  The state can always "interfere with the practice of religion" if the regulation is narrowly tailored to address some compelling government interest.  

In Mooney v. Lynch (2016), the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals denied a challenge from the Oklevueha Native American Church.  In that case, a "church" sued the federal government, claiming that laws against marijuana interfered with the free exercise of their religion.  Judges disagreed because, "nothing in the record demonstrated that a prohibition on cannabis forced the plaintiffs to choose between obedience to their religion and criminal sanction, such that they were being coerced to act contrary to their religious beliefs."

To date, nobody has ever convinced a federal judge that laws against selling marijuana actually impose a "substantial burden" on the free exercise of their religion.  There have been a handful of cases in which Native American churches have won lawsuits against the federal government, but those cases turned on technical, procedural issues.  The courts did not actually determine that Native American religious practices trump federal drug laws, and the rulings do not affect other litigants who were not parties to those cases.

As I mentioned above, though, there are legal ways to grow, use and sell marijuana in California -- but claiming that cannabis is a "sacrament" is not your best strategy.  If you or a loved one has questions about forming a legal marijuana farm or dispensary in Southern California, call us for a free attorney consultation.  (714) 449-3335.  Ask for John.

Fullerton Marijuana Lawyer

Is it Worth My Time to Fight a Restraining Order?

I believe I've posted about this question before, but I still hear it a few times every week. Callers tell me that an ex-girlfriend or a former co-worker has filed a restraining order petition against them. They don't see the petitioner anymore and they have no reason or desire to have further contact with that person. As they see it, a restraining order really wouldn't affect their life in any way -- it wouldn't prohibit them from doing anything that they really want to do. Why take the time and effort to fight it?

There are plenty of good reasons to oppose a restraining order, even if you agree to the petitioner's basic demands (e.g. stay away, have no contact, do not follow or stalk, etc.), and even if you have no interest in doing those things anyway. Having a restraining order issued against you will affect your life in ways that might not be obvious. These court orders are public records. Subjects of restraining orders forfeit various rights that the rest of us enjoy. Being the subject of a restraining order may also lead to some other nightmare scenarios that I've seen, and that I'll describe below.

Even if you're not interested in the restraining order, your employer might be. As mentioned, restraining orders are public records. They're available for anyone to see, with or without your permission. They are easily discovered by a simple background check. Most courts even put this information online now. Being the subject of a restraining order can make you ineligible to hold certain jobs or professional licenses. Good luck getting a security clearance or a Global Entry pass with an active restraining order against you.

Anyone who is the subject of a restraining order is prohibited from owning or possessing firearms. If there's a restraining order against you, you may not even have access to firearms that someone else in your home owns. If you already own guns, you will be ordered to surrender them to local police, or else sell them to a licensed dealer immediately. You may not simply give them or "sell" them to a friend or family member for safekeeping. If your job requires you to carry a weapon in the course of your duties, you might be looking for a new job. Again, good luck finding work with a restraining order on your record.

Having a restraining order issued against you may also make you vulnerable to false accusations or "accidental violations". If the petitioner spots you (or someone who looks like you) in a restaurant or a public place, she is likely to call the police. Even if you haven't "knowingly and willfully" violated the order, you can expect an unpleasant and embarrassing encounter with investigators. I've handled too many cases where my client accidentally butt-dialed an ex-girlfriend, allegedly violating an active restraining order. If your email gets hacked and your account starts sending spam messages to everyone in your address book, you could end up back in court trying to explain yourself.

Take restraining orders seriously, and make the necessary preparations to ensure the best outcome possible for your case. Of course, the best way to effectively prepare for your day in court is to retain a qualified, local expert. If you or a loved one has questions about restraining orders, call us for a free attorney consultation.  (714) 449-3335. Ask for John.

Thanks for reading.

Orange County Restraining Order Lawyer

How to Fight a Restraining Order When the Petitioner is Crazy

One of the inherent problems in restraining order court is that anybody can file a petition against anybody else, at any time.  This often means that the petitioner (the person seeking the protection of a restraining order), is crazy.  He or she may be paranoid, delusional, senile, drug-addled, vindictive, or just plain nuts.

If a crazy person is seeking a restraining order against you, presenting an effective defense can be tricky.  It is not sufficient to simply argue that the petitioner is crazy.  Instead, you must carefully show the judge that your opponent is detached from reality, and that the allegations against you are entirely made up.  The goal here is to prove that the accusations against you are false, not just to prove that the person making the accusations is erratic or afflicted with some mental disease.

This defense strategy can be more complicated and difficult than some people expect.  Even if you have personal knowledge of the petitioner's mental health problems, the rules of evidence will restrict the types of arguments that you're allowed to present in court.  First of all, you may not testify that somebody else told you about the petitioner's diagnosis.  That would be hearsay.  The person who actually made that diagnosis must appear in court to testify.  If that person is the petitioner's doctor, then the rules of confidentiality would prohibit the doctor from revealing the petitioner's medical records.

In some types of restraining order hearings, hearsay is admissible.  Even if this evidence may come in under the hearsay rules, it may still be excluded if you are not qualified to render an opinion on the subject.  Before any evidence is admissible in court, the witness must "lay the foundation" -- that is, you must prove that you possess the knowledge that you're now presenting as fact.  Psychiatric diagnoses are obviously complicated medical issues.  Even if you've personally observed "crazy" behavior by the petitioner, the judge will not allow you to express an opinion about the petitioner's medical condition or mental state because you're simply not qualified to do so.

Remember also that even crazy people have the right to be free from civil harassment and domestic violence.  If your defense is that the petitioner is crazy, you must be careful not to blame the victim for your harassment.  You must be extremely mindful not to argue that the petitioner deserves to be harassed because she is crazy.  Instead, you must argue that you have not harassed anybody.  If the petitioner believes that you have harassed her, you must prove that she is mistaken and that her false beliefs are rooted in delusions.  This is done by effectively cross-examining the witness in court.  A qualified attorney knows how to ask probing questions, drill down on the details, let the witness discuss her false beliefs, and give her enough rope to hang herself.  A lawyer who is experienced in the art of cross-examination will not argue with the witness or become confrontational.  Instead, the witness should have the opportunity to destroy her own credibility.

Last, and most important, is to always consider the relevance of any argument that you want to present.  The big question in restraining order court is always whether or not the petitioner can prove that the respondent has engaged in harassment or domestic violence.  The court is not interested in determining whether or not you're a good person, or whether the opposing party is a bad person, or whether someone has lied about something unrelated in the past, or who was responsible for the breakup, or even if one party suffers from a mental illness.  Those issues might be important to you, and they might be loosely related to something in your case, but the court simply does not care.  It might be tempting, but you must not waste the court's time and your own by focusing on details that are legally irrelevant.

Every piece of evidence that you present as the respondent must support the fact that you have not engaged in conduct that would legally justify the issuance of a restraining order.  If your argument is that the petitioner is crazy, you must prove that the allegations against you are untrue.  The petitioner's mental health issues are not an excuse for your bad behavior.  Instead, those delusions help explain why the petitioner falsely believes that you have done something inappropriate.

If you or a loved one has questions about restraining orders in California, call our office for a free attorney consultation.  714 449 3335.  Ask for John.

Thanks for reading.

Orange County Restraining Order Lawyer

Can I Get a DUI on Private Property?

In California, you can be arrested for DUI on private property, off-road, or even on the water.  

Section 23152 of the California Vehicle Code prohibits anybody from operating a vehicle while they are under the influence of drugs or alcohol. The DA doesn't need to prove that you were on a public road. They don't even need to prove that the vehicle was an automobile.  

I've had clients accused of riding dirt bikes, jet skis and golf carts while drunk (not all at the same time). In California, all of those situations can be treated as "DUI". Hiring an experienced DUI defense attorney can be very helpful in these cases, though. Often, the kind of officers who arrest drunken dirt bikers, boaters or golfers are inexperienced in making those types of arrests. They don't have the training or resources to properly prosecute DUI cases. Park rangers and harbor patrol officers might mishandle evidence or fail to file documents in a timely manner.

You can even be cited for riding a bicycle while drunk in California ("Cycling Under the Influence, or "CUI"), but those cases are treated a little differently. CUI is an infraction only and not a misdemeanor, so the court cannot impose jail time or probation. Bicycles obviously aren't "motor vehicles", so the 0.08% BAC limit doesn't apply, and the DMV will not suspend your driver's license or impose mandatory classes. To be guilty of CUI, the officer must prove that you were so impaired by alcohol and /or drugs that you could not operate a bicycle with the skill and care of an ordinary cyclist (whatever that means). If you are cited for CUI, you may demand a breath or blood test, but you are not required to take one.  

If you or a loved one has questions about DUI in California, call us for a free attorney consultation. (714) 449-3335. Ask for John. 

Fullerton DUI Lawyer

How Can I Drop Domestic Violence Charges?

Here's a situation that our office sees very frequently:  A couple (married, dating, etc.) has a big, blowup argument.  The police show up and one party accuses the other of domestic violence.  Someone spends the night in jail.  The police conduct an investigation and the DA files criminal charges against the party that they determine to be "the aggressor".

By the time the case ends up in court, emotions have cooled, the parties have attended some counseling and the "victim" no longer desires the involvement of the courts.  She asks prosecutors to drop the case, but they refuse.  Instead, the DA proceeds "full speed ahead", with or without cooperation from the reporting party / "victim". 

Many of my clients are surprised to learn that an alleged victim of domestic violence cannot simply "drop the charges" in California.  The decision of whether to file / drop criminal cases is made by the District Attorney's Office.  Prosecutors may consult with victims, but they're not legally required to follow a victim's wishes.  

When a victim asks to drop charges (or indicates that she will not cooperate in a prosecution), the DA must decide whether or not they believe that they have a strong case without their victim's testimony.  The evidence might include a recorded 911 call where the victim describes events as they're happening ("He's hitting me now! Help!").  The suspect might be heard in the background shouting threats.  The police might have recorded an interview with the victim near the time of the incident in which she discusses her injuries and how they occurred.  Cops might have photographed the injuries to corroborate the reporting party's story.  Maybe other witness tell police that they saw the suspect personally striking the victim, etc.  In those situations, prosecutors will aggressively follow through with a criminal prosecution even if the victim asks them to dismiss the case.  Their reasoning is easy to understand -- they can prove that the suspect has committed a serious, violent crime against the People of the State of California.  He shouldn't be allowed to intimidate his victim into recanting her story.  Prosecutors have a responsibility to protect vulnerable citizens and to seek justice against those who would do them harm.  Plus, they don't need the victim's testimony to win a conviction.  There's enough independent evidence to prove the charges even without her cooperation.  That much makes sense.  

Most cases aren't that cut and dry, though.  A fact pattern that I see more commonly goes like this: Both parties have been drinking or using drugs and arguing.  At some point, one party (or a neighbor, or a stranger) calls police to report something nebulous ("I think they're fighting or something.  I heard a loud noise", etc.).  When the police show up, one party or both accuses the other of domestic violence.  There are no injuries, witnesses or physical evidence to support the accusations, but cops take a report anyway.  By the time the case ends up in court, the accuser changes her story.  Maybe she admits that she exaggerated a little, or even that she was the aggressor.  In these situations, an ethical prosecutor should consider the interests of justice, the wishes of the parties, the cost to taxpayers, the burden to the court system, and their priorities in general.  When those considerations tilt in favor of dropping the case, they should do so. 

But these guys didn't get to be overpaid government employees by making reasonable decisions.  Often, prosecutors need a little arm-twisting to help them come to their senses.  That's where we step in.  Our professional staff can help dig you out of a hole without making the hole any deeper.  We have extensive experience defending against all types of domestic violence cases in Orange County, Los Angeles, Riverside and San Bernardino.  We can deal directly with investigators, witnesses and prosecutors to ensure that your rights are protected.  Domestic violence charges may carry harsh, mandatory penalties.  They're complicated, emotional matters and they require the attention of an expert. 

If you or a loved one has questions about domestic violence, call us for a free attorney consultation. (714) 449-3335.  Ask for John.  Thanks for reading. 

Fullerton Domestic Violence Lawyer

The Dani Mathers Case Has Nothing to Do With "Body Shaming"

I've been meaning to write something about this one for a while now. Sorry if this is last month's news, but I haven't had much free time to spend with the blog lately.

Former Playmate Dani Mathers was convicted last month of violating section 647(j)(3)(A) of the California Penal Code. That law makes it a misdemeanor to violate someone's privacy by secretly photographing or videotaping them while the victim is a partially or fully undressed. Ms. Mathers had snapped a picture of an older woman showering at the gym, then posted the picture to social media with a derisive comment about the woman's physique.

The news media has completely missed the point with this story. The articles I've read keep referring to the conviction as a case of "body shaming", like Ms. Mathers' crime was the act of publicly ridiculing someone for being overweight or unattractive. That's completely wrong. It is not a crime to insult or ridicule fat people. If Ms. Mathers had snapped a picture of a fat person in a public place, posted the picture on social media and captioned the photo with a comment about the subject's weight, there would be no crime. If you're in public, you have almost no "reasonable expectation of privacy". Strangers may photograph you, post those pictures online and comment about your physical appearance. There are some exceptions (using a hidden camera to peek up your skirt, or using the photos commercially, etc.), but I'll save that discussion for another post.

The crime here was the act of intruding upon the subject's "reasonable expectation of privacy". The important fact in this case was that the older woman was photographed without her permission, while she was undressed, in a place where she reasonably understood that she would not be photographed (in a shower at the gym).

If Ms. Mathers had snapped a picture in the shower without the subject's consent and captioned the photo with a positive, complimentary comment like, "Look at this gorgeous grandmother! She looks great for 70!", she would still be guilty of the same crime.

The Dani Mathers case had everything to do with "intrusion upon privacy" and nothing to do with "body shaming".

If you or a loved one has questions about privacy, "revenge porn" or public use of your image, call us for a free attorney consultation. (714) 449-3335. Ask for John.

Thanks for reading.

Orange County Criminal Defense Attorney

Send an Offensive Text Message, Lose Your Gun Rights

Many of my clients are shocked to learn how quickly a rude or offensive text message can cost them their gun rights in California.  Don't make that mistake.  Before you hit "send", think about what you're willing to sacrifice.

California has a very permissive system of issuing restraining orders, especially in cases of alleged domestic violence -- and the definition of "domestic violence" in California is expansive.  The court will issue a restraining order when the petitioner can prove "by a preponderance of the evidence" (a very low burden) that the respondent has "harassed" him or her.  "Harassment" includes some behavior that we might not consider to be "abuse" or "domestic violence" within the conventional meanings of those terms.  Harassment in California includes any course of conduct, directed at a specific person, which serves no lawful purpose, and which would cause a reasonable person to suffer emotional distress.

"Harassment" in restraining order hearings often includes rude, offensive or insulting text messages or emails.  Calling your ex-girlfriend a "bitch" in a text message may be the grounds for the court to slap you with domestic violence restraining order, even if you never hurt or threatened anyone.  In many cases, a judge may find that an insulting text message meets the definition of "harassment", described above.

A judge can also issue a domestic violence restraining order when one party has sent repeated, unwanted messages to an ex.  Depending on the circumstances, sending annoying text messages may constitute "harassment".  The messages don't even have to be rude or insulting. If your ex-girlfriend has asked you to stop calling or texting, you are legally obligated to respect her wishes.  If you continue sending her unwanted messages, she may take those screen shots to court and get a restraining order against you.

Anyone who is the subject of a restraining order in California must immediately surrender all their firearms to the local police, or else sell them to a licensed gun dealer.  You may not simply "sell" your collection to a friend or have a family member hold your weapons.  You also may not buy, possess or even have access to firearms while the restraining order is in effect.  If you're a hunter, collector or target shooter, you may be legally barred from enjoying your hobbies for up to 5 years.

The laws and procedures regarding restraining orders in California are complicated. If you or a loved one has questions about the process, call us for a free attorney consultation.  (714) 449-3335.  Ask for John.

Orange County Restraining Orders

How to Legally Grow Marijuana in California

If you want to grow marijuana in California (and you care about doing it legally), the first step is to stop taking bad advice from your friends.  There's a lot of misinformation out there.  Despite the recent reforms, people are still calling my office because they've been arrested for some marijuana-related crime.  Cannabis cultivation can be a minefield if you don't understand the law.

Since voters approved Prop 63, adults age 21 and older may cultivate up to 6 plants for their personal, recreational consumption.  The 6-plant limit applies to each piece of property, not to each adult.  If 3 adults live together in one house, they may cultivate a total of 6 plants in their backyard, not 18.  They can give away small amounts of their crop to friends, but they're still not allowed to sell it or trade it for anything of value.

If you have a doctor's recommendation to use medical marijuana, the 6-plant limit does not apply. You may cultivate as much as your doctor says that you need for your condition.  Be very wary, though, of so-called "99-Plant" recommendations that many doctors sell for a few extra dollars.  Remember that a rec is only as valuable as the doctor who will actually come to court and testify on your behalf.  If you are arrested and accused of cultivating an excessive amount of cannabis, do you really trust that your doctor that will show up in court and tell the judge that he examined you in good faith?  Do you believe he will testify that, in his professional opinion, you need 99 plants for your personal use?

Also keep in mind that doctors cannot issue "cultivation licenses" in California.  Regardless of whatever bad legal advice your doctor gave you (and regardless of whatever worthless piece of paper he sold you), his 99-plant recommendation does not entitle you to grow a large crop or to sell your excess harvest to a local dispensary.  There is a legal way to grow marijuana for sale (keep reading), but you should not simply rely on your doctor's 99-plant rec as a defense to marijuana charges.

There are currently 2 ways to legally sell marijuana (or to exchange it for anything of value) in California.  The first option is to apply for a license from the California Bureau of Cannabis Control.  The BCC issues specific licenses for indoor and outdoor grows of various sizes.  If you hold a valid, state-issued cultivation license, you may grow marijuana and sell it for profit, subject to some complicated regulations.  Call our office if you have questions about applying for one of these licenses. 

The other option to legally cultivate cannabis for sale is through a non-profit medical marijuana dispensary.  Dispensaries can take many forms -- unincorporated associations, agricultural collectives, or nonprofit mutual benefit corporations (this is the most common form and the method that the California Attorney General recommends).  Buyers and sellers of medical marijuana must be members of the same non-profit dispensary; sales from one entity to another entity (or from one club to another club, or from one freelance grower to a collective, etc.) is still illegal.  If you want to grow for a medical dispensary, you must be a member of that dispensary, and you should have some written documentation to that effect.  You should either be employed by the dispensary as a grower, or else you should have a written contract between yourself and the dispensary wherein you agree to provide cannabis and the club agrees to pay you a salary.

If you or a loved one has questions about legally growing or selling marijuana in California, call us for a free attorney consultation. (714) 449-3335. Ask for John.

Thanks for reading.

Orange County Marijuana Lawyer

Can You Be Arrested for DUI if Your Blood Alcohol Level is Below 0.08%?

Many drivers are surprised to learn that they can be arrested for DUI in California even if their blood alcohol concentration (BAC) is below the legal limit of 0.08%.

In California, "DUI" is actually several distinct crimes: 1) driving while unsafely impaired by alcohol, 2) driving with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.08% or greater, 3) driving under the influence of drugs, and 4) driving under the combined influence of alcohol and some drug(s).  A driver might be charged with a single count or with multiple counts, depending on the circumstances.  

Police often encounter drivers who appear to be impaired by some substance, even when their blood alcohol level is low.  The driver might be a "lightweight" who is especially sensitive to alcohol, or he might be intoxicated by some drug(s), or by some combination of alcohol and drugs.  If police have probable cause to believe that the driver is impaired by any substance or combination of substances to such a degree that he cannot operate a vehicle safely, he will be arrested on suspicion of DUI and taken to the police station for a blood test.  

Depending on the results of that blood test and the totality of the circumstances, the DA will decide whether or not to file criminal charges against the driver.  If prosecutors believe they can prove that the driver was dangerously impaired by alcohol, they will charge the driver with violating VC 23152(a), regardless of his BAC.  If his BAC is above 0.08%, they may additionally charge the driver with violating VC 23152(b).  

If a blood test shows that a driver is impaired by drugs, he may be charged with violating VC 23152(f).  This includes legally prescribed drugs, illegal drugs, sleep aids and marijuana -- any substance(s) that may impair a driver's ability to operate a vehicle with the skill and care of a normal, sober person.  These cases are complicated because it's often hard to prove a driver's precise degree of "impairment", especially when the driver has extensive experience and a very high tolerance for some prescription medication that he has taken for years.  Our firm has even represented individuals who were accused of driving under the influence of chemotherapy drugs.

To further complicate matters, the DA can charge a driver with violating VC 23152(g) if they believe that he is impaired by the combined influence of alcohol AND drugs.  

There are many possible defenses to DUI charges, but only a qualified professional can fairly evaluate your case.  If you or a loved one has questions about DUI in California, call us for a free attorney consultation. (714) 449-3335. Ask for John.  

Thanks for reading.  

Fullerton DUI Lawyer

Clean Up Your Criminal Record: Updated 2017

I wrote a post last year about the many options that can be pursued to clean up your criminal record in California.  Here's the short version of that piece:

• If you were given probation and you successfully completed the entire term without any violations, you may be eligible to have your old case dismissed. Once a case is dismissed, you may honestly state that you have no criminal convictions for most purposes. A dismissal under this section will not restore gun rights, though. 
• If you were convicted of a misdemeanor and NOT given probation, then you must wait one year from the date of your conviction or your release from custody, whichever came later. You must also prove that you have remained law-abiding since the conviction.  
• If your conviction was for a felony, the charge may be reduced to a misdemeanor in some cases. If an old felony conviction is reduced to a misdemeanor, it may restore gun rights, depending on the circumstances.  
• You must complete probation before you're eligible to apply for a dismissal. If you're still on probation, we can ask the court to terminate probation early. 

The legislature has added some new caveats over the past year to allow more types of cases to be dismissed or reduced:

• Non-traffic infractions are now eligible for dismissal under the same process.  Non-traffic infractions include things like "disturbing the peace" and "urinating in public", for example. Applicants must wait one year from the time of the conviction. 
• A conviction for engaging in prostitution under PC 647(b) can now be dismissed if the applicant can prove that he or she was the victim of human trafficking.
• If you were convicted of a felony and sentenced to county jail rather than state prison, you may now apply for a dismissal.  The waiting period depends on whether or not your sentence included "mandatory supervision".  
• If you were arrested and the case did not result in a conviction, you may be eligible to seal the record of your arrest. 

If you or a loved one has questions about cleaning up an old criminal conviction, call our office for a free attorney consultation. (714) 449-3335. Ask for John.  

Thanks for reading. 

Orange County Expungement Lawyer

What if I Get Pulled Over and My Car Smells Like Weed?

There's a lot of misinformation on this topic.  Unfortunately for a lot of my clients, that often means that they call me after they've been arrested for DUI.  Don't make that mistake.

Driving under the influence of marijuana is a DUI in California, just like driving under the influence of alcohol.  It doesn't matter if you're over 21 or if you have a doctor's recommendation to use medical marijuana.  Think of weed like alcohol -- just because you're allowed to possess it doesn't mean that you're allowed to operate a vehicle while you're under the influence.

The big difference between marijuana and alcohol is that there's no legal limit for THC and no reliable way to determine a driver's degree of impairment with weed.  Blood, urine and saliva tests cannot accurately tell us whether or not a subject is dangerously intoxicated by marijuana.  This means that marijuana DUIs are pretty arbitrary.  They often turn on the police officer's opinion based on his observations before and after the traffic stop.  The factors that I usually see listed in police reports include:

• Bad driving
• Smell of marijuana coming from the interior of the vehicle
• Driver observed smoking in a moving vehicle
• Red, glassy eyes
• Any signs that the driver is disoriented or has difficulty following instructions, etc.

The strongest evidence that the police usually gather in these cases, though, is the driver's own statements.  Way too many of my clients talk themselves into trouble after a traffic stop.  If you admit to consuming marijuana before (or while) driving, you will be arrested on suspicion of DUI. 

Without your admission of recent marijuana use, the police might not have enough evidence to arrest you.  If you keep your mouth shut and the police arrest you anyway, we'll have a much stronger defense when we appear in court.  

If you or a loved one has questions about driving under the influence of marijuana in California, call us for a free attorney consultation.  (714) 449-3335.  Ask for John.  

Thanks for reading. 

Fullerton Marijuana Lawyer

Can a Restraining Order be Resolved Before the Court Hearing?

As I've previously discussed on this blog, obtaining a restraining order in California is a 2-step process. First, the petitioner files a "Request for a Restraining Order". Within 24 hours, a judge will determine whether or not to grant a temporary order based on the facts alleged in the petition. Next, a hearing will be scheduled within 3 weeks. At the hearing, both sides will have an opportunity to present their arguments and a judge will decide whether or not to extend the order for a longer period (up to 5 years in cases involving domestic violence, or up to 3 years in cases involving civil harassment).

Unfortunately, this 2-step process often means that nonsense restraining orders are issued for 3 weeks before the respondent has an opportunity to present his side of the story in court. During this time, the respondent's life can be turned upside down. He can be barred from his home, separated from his kids and denied access to his belongings. By the time he has a chance to defend himself, the damage may be done.

Clients often ask me about resolving their restraining orders before their scheduled court hearings. Luckily, it may be possible to start negotiating a dismissal immediately, but this must be done properly. Disregarding the court's temporary orders can make a bad situation much worse. If the respondent calls the petitioner to discuss the case while the temporary order is in effect, he can be arrested. Any violation of the temporary order can also be grounds for the issuance of a permanent order, even if the petition itself was inadequate.

If you are the subject of a temporary order, you must absolutely abide by it until the time of the hearing. That means do not contact the petitioner in any way, directly or indirectly. Don't ask someone else to pass along a message. Don't send an email or a text message. Don't leave a note on her car. Don't even respond to a message from the petitioner if he or she attempts to contact you.

Your attorney may contact the petitioner to discuss your case, though. Any communication between you and the petitioner must be done through your counsel. If you need your work uniform or your medication, talk to your attorney about reaching out to the petitioner to arrange a hand-off.

Your lawyer can also start the process of trying to negotiate a dismissal before the hearing. Restraining order hearings are often arbitrary and unpredictable. No matter how strong you believe your case is, there's a pretty good chance that the judge will disagree. Whenever you choose to fight it out in court, there's a 50/50 chance that you'll lose. Stipulated dismissals (where both parties agree to resolve the case privately, rather than in court) can be a great way to ensure that both sides get 100% of whatever they want. Usually, the petitioner wants some assurance that the respondent will stay away, and the respondent wants to avoid a restraining order and everything that comes with it.

Stipulated dismissals work like this: the parties make an informal, written agreement through their attorneys. Typically, the respondent promises to stay away from the petitioner, to stop calling, to return the petitioner's iPad, etc., and the petitioner agrees to dismiss the case. If the respondent ever violates this agreement, the petitioner can go back to court and reopen the case. She'll simply show the judge the written contract and she'll explain how the respondent has violated it. Now she has a slam dunk case, and she's much more likely to win a restraining order. If the respondent demonstrates that he's unwilling or unable to abide by his promise to stay away, then the judge will see him as dangerous or unstable, and the court will grant the petitioner's restraining order. Of course, if the respondent complies with the agreement and he stays away as promised, then everybody wins.

If you've been served with a restraining order, call our office for a free attorney consultation. (714) 449-3335. Ask for John. We have extensive experience litigating restraining orders in all Southern California courts.

Thanks for reading.

Orange County Restraining Order Lawyer