What is the Statute of Limitations for Arrest Warrants in California?

The "statute of limitations" refers to the period of time after the commission of a crime in which prosecutors must file criminal charges, or else be barred from doing so.  The clock starts ticking as soon as the crime occurs.  If time expires before DA files their case, then the defendant is untouchable.  He has an "affirmative defense".  If criminal charges are filed some time after the statute of limitations has lapsed, the defendant's attorney will simply demonstrate that the complaint is defective and must be dismissed.  

Keep in mind, though, that the statute of limitations has nothing to do with the period of time in which the defendant must be brought to court after the commission of a crime.  It only refers to the period in which the DA must file charges.  That causes a lot of confusion.  

Here's a common situation:  A person is cited or arrested for some minor crime.  He shows up for court, but the DA has not filed any charges yet, so he is told to go home.  After a few months-- but still within the statute of limitations-- the DA eventually gets around to filing the case.  They mail a "Notice to Appear" letter to the defendant's last known address.  The defendant never receives the letter, so he never appears for his court date.  A warrant is issued for his arrest.  Several years later, he is surprised to learn that he has an active warrant.  

The SoL would not be the appropriate defense here because prosecutors DID file charges within the proscribed time limits.  A warrant was issued when the defendant failed to appear in court, and the warrant has remained outstanding ever since.  The warrant will never simply go away on its own.  There is no statute of limitations for arrest warrants in California.  

Even if the SoL doesn't apply, though, a defendant in this situation has another option.  When there has been some long delay between the filing of charges and the defendant's first court appearance, the issue is not with the statute of limitations.  Instead, the question is whether or not the defendant's constitutional right to a speedy trial has been violated.  

Both the US Constitution and the California State Constitution guarantee the right to a "speedy and public trial".  If the government filed criminal charges against some person and then allowed those charges to hang open for a prolonged period time without making an adequate effort to bring that person to court, then the defendant might have a viable defense based on this unconstitutional delay.  

Speedy trial violations are challenged with Serna motions.  The judge will weigh a lot of factors to decide a Serna motion.  The first consideration is the length of the delay.  Short delays might be excusable.  The longer the delay has been, though, the harder it will be for the DA to overcome.  6 months is usually the threshold where a delay starts to drift toward "unconstitutional".  

The next big consideration in any Serna motion is always the blame for the delay.  If the defendant knew about his court appearance and chose to flee, he will have a hard time convincing a judge that his rights have been violated.  If the DA mailed their "notice to appear" letter to the wrong address (or failed to send a letter at all), the blame might lie with prosecutors.  Several years ago, I had a case in which the DA mailed their notice to my client's home in New Orleans, LA.  For some reason, the envelope was addressed to "New Orleans, CA", so my client never received it.  That Serna motion was granted and all charges were dismissed.  

The final consideration in a Serna motion is any prejudice caused by the delay.  "Prejudice" can be actual or presumed.  If witnesses have died or evidence has been lost, the defendant might be able to prove actual prejudice.  He cannot properly defend himself due to the amount of time that has elapsed.  When the delay has been over a year, the court will also presume some prejudice, just based on the fact that memories fade and that the defendant has been saddled with criminal charges for an undue length of time.  Even if the defendant cannot point to any specific lost piece of evidence, the prosecutor will bear the burden of proving that no such presumed prejudice exists.  

Sometimes, arrests warrants are issued after the defendant has already make a court appearance in his case.  Maybe he showed up for the first hearing or two, then stopped attending.  In those cases, neither the SoL nor speedy trial rights apply.  Any warrant will remain active until the defendant shows up to address it.  The same is true for warrants issued after conviction (probation violations, etc.).  The defendant may have other viable defenses based on missing witnesses, lost evidence, fading memories, etc., but he has no statutory or constitutional right to have the case tossed.  

If you or a loved one has an arrest warrant in Orange County, Los Angeles, Riverside or San Bernardino, call us for a free attorney consultation.  (714) 449-3335.  Ask for John.  

Orange County Warrant Lawyer

Fight Your Domestic Violence Case with the Right Lawyer

Domestic violence charges in California can carry significant penalties.  If you or a loved one has been arrested on suspicion of domestic violence, hiring the right attorney can make all the difference.  Our office has been successfully defending against all types of domestic violence charges since 2009.  

What is Domestic Violence?

Domestic violence is defined by section 6211 of the California Family Code as abuse committed by / against people who are having or who formerly had a romantic relationship (married or dating), people who live or lived together as partners (not just roommates), and people who have a child together.  It also includes abuse between siblings, parents and grandparents.  

The most commonly charged domestic violence offense in California is probably PC 243(e)(1), commonly known as "domestic violence battery".  To be guilty of violating PC 243(e)(1), the prosecutor needs to prove that the defendant made some harmful or offensive bodily contact with the victim, and that the parties meet the criteria described above.  "Harmful or offensive bodily contact" can include things like pushing, slapping, etc.  

If the victim is injured, prosecutors can raise the charges from 243(e)(1) to 273.5, "inflicting injury on a spouse or cohabitant".  More on that below.  

Contrary to its name, "domestic violence" encompasses some crimes that are not necessarily "violent".  Vandalism, for instance, can be treated as domestic violence.  It also includes things like child neglect, violating a domestic violence restraining order, and making harassing phone calls, if the DA can prove that the crime involved "abuse" by / against a family member.  

Penalties for Domestic Violence in California

Domestic violence battery (PC 243(e)(1)) is a misdemeanor, punishable by up to 1 year in jail and a fine of $2,000.00.  Once the court's mandatory "costs and fees" are tabulated, that $2,000.00 fine is a lot closer to $6,000.00

Inflicting injury on a spouse / cohabitant (PC 273.5) is a wobbler, meaning that it can be treated as a misdemeanor or a felony, depending on the circumstances.  If the charge is filed as a misdemeanor, the maximum penalty is 1 year in jail and a fine up to $6,000.00 (more like $30,000.00, with costs and fees).  If prosecutors elect to treat the charge as a felony, the maximum punishment is 4 years in prison for a first offense.  Penalties go up for repeated violations. 

Anyone who is convicted of violating PC 243(e)(1) or PC 273.5 must attend and complete a 52-week, court-approved anger management counseling program.  They must also complete at least 8 hours of community service.  Other domestic violence-related offenses might only require a 10-12 hour course of anger management counseling.  

For many people, the most significant consequence of a domestic violence conviction pertains to gun rights.  Any person who is found guilty of violating PC 243(e)(1) or 273.5 will be banned from possessing firearms and ammunition for life.  

Can the Victim Drop the Charges?

In most domestic violence cases, the alleged victim wants to drop the charges.  Once things cool down, she decides that the situation was blown out of proportion and she does not want to see her husband prosecuted over a little argument.  Unfortunately, it's not up to her.  The decision to prosecute rests with the DA.  They alone file charges, and they alone decide when / if to drop them.  

If prosecutors believe that they can win a conviction without the victim's cooperation, they will charge ahead.  Often, they don't need the victim's testimony to build a solid case.  They might have a 911 recording in which the victim describes what is happening as it happens.  The defendant might be clearly audible in the background of the recording.  Other witnesses might have seen what happened and given statements to police.  If the victim spoke to officers at the scene, then her words were probably recorded by body-worn-cameras.  Police probably took photos of any injuries and damaged property.  Even if the victim refuses to testify against her husband, the DA can simply use the evidence to tell their story. 

If an alleged victim really wants to help the defendant, the best thing that she can do is to cooperate with his lawyer.  A qualified criminal defense attorney (like myself) understands the rules of evidence and what it takes to make or break a case.  Always consult with counsel before speaking to police or prosecutors.  

Often, witnesses statements contained in police reports are wildly inaccurate, incomplete, or out of context.  As written, the reports might give a completely false picture of what actually happened.  We can help cooperative victims and witnesses prepare written statements to clarify important details in the police reports, correct any mistakes, and add context so the court better understands the truth.  

EPOs, CPOs and DVROs

Domestic violence cases may also involve Emergency Protective Orders (EPOs), Criminal Protective Orders (CPOs), and Domestic Violence Restraining Orders (DVROs).  Each of these orders can potentially do the same things, but they are issued under different circumstances.  Typically, the restrained party is ordered to stay some distance away from the protected person, as well as that person's home, school, workplace, vehicle, etc.  

An EPO is usually issued at or near the time of the arrest.  These are issued by judges at the request of the police.  They can remain in effect for up to one week.  

If the defendant remains in custody after his arrest, he will be brought to court for his arraignment within about 3 days.  When he makes his first court appearance, the judge will issue a CPO that will remain in effect while the case is pending.  A CPO may allow for "peaceful contact" between the parties if they both want it, and if the judge agrees to allow it.  While a peaceful contact order is in effect, the parties may be near each other.  They can even live in the same house.  If the restrained party becomes aggressive at any time, though, the protected person can call the police and have him removed from the house and / or arrested.  

If the defendant is convicted of some crime involving domestic violence, a CPO may remain in effect for up to 10 years.  

A victim of domestic violence may separately request a DVRO in Family Court.  I have previously written extensively on this blog about the process of seeking / fighting a DVRO.  

Domestic violence cases are complicated and the stakes are high.  If you or a loved one has been arrested or charged for any offense involving domestic violence, call us for a free attorney consultation.  (714) 449-3335.  Ask for John.  

Thanks for reading. 

Fullerton domestic violence lawyer

Should I Apply for a Restraining Order in California?

I've previously written extensively on this blog about the nuts and bolts of California restraining order laws -- how to get one, how to fight one, how to modify / terminate one, the rules of evidence that apply at restraining order hearings, and just about every other angle that I can think of.  

Today, though, I want to specifically address the question of WHETHER you should seek the protection of a restraining order.  If you're thinking about seeking a restraining order against someone else, read this before taking the plunge.  I'll discuss the various types of restraining orders that courts in California can grant, who they protect, the types of behaviors that can be enjoined (prohibited) and a few other issues that the petitioner should consider in advance. 

Getting Started

The person seeking the restraining order is called the "petitioner" (he or she files the petition to request a restraining order).  The restrained person is called the "respondent" (he or she responds to the petition).  

Once the petitioner files the initial request for restraining order, the court may issue temporary orders on the spot.  Those orders will remain in effect until the time of a hearing, usually about 21 days later.  At the hearing, each side will have an opportunity to tell their own version of the story, and also to present evidence and witnesses.  

Serving the Papers on the Respondent

Between the time of filing and the time of the scheduled hearing (inside that 21-day window), the petitioner must arrange to have someone personally serve all of the appropriate documents on the respondent.  The documents will notify the respondent of the date & time of the hearing, any temporary orders, and will also include the petitioner's description of why he / she feels that a restraining order is necessary.  

The petitioner cannot serve the documents him / herself -- someone who is not a party to the case must perform the service.  The person who serves the documents must also prepare and sign a document called a "proof of service", swearing under penalty of perjury that the papers were, in fact, personally served on the respondent.  The sheriff's department will usually serve court documents for free or a small fee.  The "proof of service" form must be returned to the court and filed before the time of the hearing.  The court will not go forward with the hearing unless the judge is satisfied that the respondent has been properly served and notified.  

Service is one of the first issues that the petitioner should consider -- do I actually know how to find the respondent?  If the respondent is homeless or has moved out of the state, personal service might be impossible.  If you don't realistically believe that you can find the respondent within 21 days and have him personally served, then a restraining order might be a waste of your time.  

Where to File

There are a few different types of restraining orders that courts can issue.  The type of order depends on the relationship of the parties.  If the parties are closely related, were formerly in a relationship or share a child together, then the case would be filed as a "Request for Domestic Violence Restraining Order", and the matter would be heard in the family court.  If the parties are coworkers, or if the petitioner alleges that he / she was harassed on the job, then the case would be considered "Workplace Violence" and would be heard in the civil court.  Other disputes (not involving family members or co-workers) usually fall under the umbrella of "Civil Harassment" restraining orders, which are also heard in the civil court.  

The venue where the case is filed can have a huge impact on the overall trial strategy.  The rules vary, depending on the type of order involved and the court where the case is being heard.  In cases involving domestic violence, for example, the petitioner's burden of proof is lower, but the rules of evidence are more restrictive.  Speak with a qualified, local attorney (like myself) to determine the most advantageous venue for your restraining order petition.  

"Harassment"

Another initial consideration should be whether or not the petitioner's allegations actually rise to a level that meets the legal definition of "harassment".  Like many other words in the English language, the court's definition of "harassment" is not exactly the same as the word's definition in common usage.  

In order to meet the court's standard of "harassment", the behavior in question must meet several criteria.  Harassment requires a "course of conduct".  A course of conduct is something that demonstrates a continuity of purpose, not merely a single, anomalous act.  That course of conduct must be directed AT the petitioner.  Conduct that merely affects the petitioner, but is not directed towards the petitioner, is not sufficient to warrant a restraining order, no matter how serious the effects of the conduct might be on the petitioner.  

Example:  Fred smokes big cigars in his backyard all day long.  His neighbor, Karen, is very sensitive to cigar smoke because of some medical conditions.  Fred's cigar smoke causes Karen to suffer panic attacks.  She can't sleep at night and her medical conditions get much worse.  If she files a restraining order against Fred to make him stop smoking, the judge would be correct to deny her request.  Fred's cigar smoke might annoy Karen and it might even cause serious health consequences for her, but there is no evidence that Fred is acting with the intent to annoy or harass her.  His conduct is not "directed at" her.  The mere fact that his behavior affects her is not sufficient to warrant a restraining order.

Additionally, the petitioner must prove that the conduct in question serves no legal purpose, that it would cause a reasonable person to suffer emotional distress, and that it did, in fact, cause the petitioner to suffer distress.  This excludes conduct that might cause the respondent to suffer serious emotional trauma, but which also serves a valid, lawful purpose (attempting to collect a debt or to serve legal papers, etc.).  It also excludes conduct that seriously affects the petitioner, but would not cause a reasonable person to suffer the same emotional distress.  Finally, it excludes conduct where the petitioner appears to be the aggressor, or where the petitioner has not behaved in a way that suggests he / she is seriously afraid of the respondent.  

Proving the Case

The petitioner has the burden of proving the case.  In domestic violence cases, the threshold is "a preponderance of the evidence".  That means the petitioner must tip the scales by 51%.  This is a low burden, but it's not always as easy to overcome as it sounds.  If the evidence is perfectly even (i.e., the petitioner claims that something happened and the respondent simply denies it), then the petitioner has not carried the burden.  In that situation, the respondent wins and order is denied.  

In other types of restraining orders (civil harassment, workplace violence, etc.), the petitioner must prove the case by "clear and convincing evidence".  This is a higher burden that the "preponderance of evidence" standard that applies in DVROs, but lower than the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard that applies in criminal trials.  

To prove the case, the petitioner should come to court prepared with reliable, admissible exhibits.  The rules of evidence are complicated, though.  Again, a qualified, local attorney (like myself) can help ensure that any exhibits are supported by the proper foundations and that they meet the court's standards for admissibility.  

Both sides can also present witnesses to testify at the hearing, if those witnesses personally observed something that is relevant and material to the judge's decision.  In some types of hearings, witnesses can even testify to hearsay (things that someone else told them).  

The Scope of the Orders

If the petitioner can overcome those initial hurdles (finding / serving the respondent, making a compelling case to establish that harassment has actually occurred, and proving that the respondent is the person who committed the harassment), the next question for the petitioner should be -- What am I asking for?  Is this something that the court actually has the authority to order?  

Restraining orders typically prohibit one party from coming within some distance of certain people and places.  They can also bar the respondent from contacting the petitioner and other members of the petitioner's household.  Occasionally, they also include orders for the return of property / pets, transfer of cell phones, etc.  If those kinds of orders would solve your problems, then a restraining order might be appropriate.

Keep in mind, though, that there are limits to the court's power and there are many things that the judge simply cannot order or enforce.  The judge will not, for example, order someone to stop talking ABOUT you.  The respondent will always be free to tell other people what he thinks about you, as long as he does not say it to you personally.  This includes posting about you on social media, as long as the posts do not "tag" you or messages are not sent directly to you.  

The court also cannot order the respondent to stop calling law enforcement to complain about you.  The respondent will always be free to call the police, code enforcement, animal control, Child Protective Services, parking authorities, etc., no mater how much you feel that the complaints are unfounded.  If this person is making reports that he or she knows to be false, the police will handle that on their own.  

Sensitive Issues

At the time of the hearing, the petitioner will be required to tell his or her story in open court.  The courtroom may be packed with strangers.  The opposing party or his / her lawyer will have an opportunity to cross-examine you and to pepper you with questions about your allegations.  They will try to demonstrate that you are lying or that you have some incentive to misstate the facts.  The judge may also ask questions to gauge your credibility and to drill down on important details.  

Petitioner should seriously think about whether or not he / she wants to answer questions about the allegations in open court and subject him/herself to cross-examination.  For many petitioners, the court hearings are more stressful than the underlying harassment.  

Anything said in court during a restraining order hearing becomes a public record.  If you admit to some wrongdoing, your statement may be used against you later in criminal court.  It might also complicate any pending criminal cases related to the underlying allegations. 

Conclusion

Before investing a lot of time, effort, money and emotional bandwidth to pursue a restraining order, the petitioner should seriously consider the hurdles that must be overcome at each stage of the proceedings.  

There are complicated legal issues involved with any restraining order.  I can help with that part.  There are also complicated emotional questions, though, that no lawyer can answer for you.  The purpose of this post is to help restraining order petitioners understand, anticipate and avoid some of the common hang-ups that lead to cases being dismissed or abandoned.  

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. 

Restraining Order Lawyer

Can I Get Out of an Existing Restraining Order?

As I've previously written on this blog, there are a million reasons that people seek restraining orders against each other.  Coworkers, neighbors, exes and even siblings sometimes have conflicts that end up in court.  After hearing all of the evidence presented, judges can issue restraining orders that remain in effect for up to 5 years -- and longer if renewed.  Criminal Protective Orders can even remain in effect for up to 10 years.

A lot can change in 5-10 years, though.  Parties might mutually decide to reestablish contact, or circumstances might be so different that the restraining order no longer serves any purpose.  These situations can leave one party as the subject of an order that nobody actually wants, including all of the disabilities and loss of rights that go along with being the subject of a restraining order.  

Luckily, California law allows courts to modify or terminate existing restraining orders and Criminal Protective Orders.  The protected party (AKA, "the petitioner") may simply request to terminate the order at any time by filing a few simple forms.  The judge will probably have a couple of questions, like, "Did anyone threaten you or force you to do this?", "Is this what you want?", etc. but these hearings are usually quick and easy when the request comes from the protected party.  

If the restrained party (AKA, "the respondent") wants to terminate or modify an existing restraining order, he bears the burden of proving that the order no longer serves the purpose for which it was issued.  This is not his opportunity to argue that the order never should have been granted in the first place (or that he got bad legal advice, or that someone lied during the hearing, etc.).  Those issues have already been decided.  The respondent had an opportunity to raise those arguments at the time of the hearing on the original order, or else to file an appeal if he believes that the trial judge made some mistake of law.  We are now past that stage. 

This is also not the respondent's chance to argue that the order is burdensome, it hurts his ability to find a job, or that it infringes upon his 2nd Amendment rights.  Those things were all true at the time the order was granted, and they are still true for every order that the court issues.  If those were valid arguments, then court would never grant restraining orders against anyone.  

Instead, the respondent should focus on explaining any change in circumstances since the order was originally issued.  Specifically, he needs to prove that the order is no longer necessary because the risk of harm no longer exists.  A judge hearing the request will start from the assumption that the order was originally granted for a good reason.  The person requesting the modification should acknowledge that reason and explain why it is no longer valid today.  If abusive behavior was related to alcohol, for example, maybe the respondent can prove that that he has received extensive alcohol treatment and maintained a significant period of sobriety.  Treatment + sobriety would be considered "changed circumstances" that might convince a judge to modify or terminate a restraining order.  

Our office was recently able to help a client successfully terminate an Elder Abuse restraining order.  The order no longer served any purpose, but it continued to have a severe impact on the client's life.  In this case, the protected party was an elderly woman.  The restrained party was her adult son.  The son was prohibited from coming within 100 yards of his mother, her home or her vehicle.  In the years since the order was issued, the mother had passed away.  Her home and her vehicle had both been sold by the executor of her estate.  There was nothing that still needed to be protected today, but my client continued to carry around this worthless restraining order.  The judge agreed that the order no longer served any valid purpose and so it was terminated. 

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

Thanks for reading.  

Orange County Restraining Order Attorney

Can I Get a DUI for Sleeping in a Parked Car?

Marshawn Lynch was arrested in Las Vegas last week on suspicion of DUI.  Officers allegedly found Beast Mode asleep behind the wheel of a parked car.  The story inspired me to write a blog post about a question that I hear a lot: can I be arrested for DUI if I'm found sleeping in my car?  Does it matter if the keys are in the ignition?

The answer is different from state to state.  In some places, like Nevada, a defendant can be found guilty of DUI if he is "in control of a vehicle" while under the influence of alcohol.  Other states, like California, require prosecutors to prove that the defendant "operated a vehicle" while under the influence.  That subtle distinction - "in control of" vs. "operated" makes a huge difference in practice.  

Under the Nevada law, a defendant who is passed out in a parked car could be found to be "in control of the vehicle" if the keys are in the ignition.  I am not licensed to practice in Nevada, so I don't intend to make this post into a detailed analysis of Nevada law, other than to note this important point.

In California, a defendant is not guilty of DUI unless prosecutors can prove that he or she "operated a vehicle", and that the defendant's blood alcohol concentration (BAC) was >0.08% at the time of driving.  "Operating a vehicle" involves exercising some control over the movement of the car -- even moving one inch.  Simply sleeping in a parked car is not necessarily a DUI in California unless prosecutors can prove the defendant was drunk when he /she parked the car.  It makes no difference whether or not the keys are in the ignition when police discover the sleeping suspect.  

Of course, police in California can still arrest a suspect if the person is found drunk in a public place.  The interior of a car is considered a "public place" if the car is parked somewhere that is generally accessible to the public, regardless of who actually owns the land.  In California, we call that "drunk in public".  In Nevada, they call it "DUI".  Since the Nevada DUI statute is broader than the same law in California -- it encompasses behavior that would not be considered "DUI" in California -- DUI convictions from Nevada are not counted as "priors" in California.

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

Thanks for reading. 

Fullerton DUI Lawyer

Should I Represent Myself In Criminal Court?

People who choose to represent themselves in court are sometimes called "self-represented litigants" (SRLs), or "pro pers" (from the Latin, "In Propia Persona" -- "for himself").  

There are plenty of legal issues that don't necessarily require attorneys.  Small Claims Court, for example, is intentionally designed to be as simple and straightforward as possible, so that individuals can resolve minor civil disputes without the cost of lawyers.  In restraining order hearings, about half of the parties are usually represented by professionals.  Evictions, name changes, emancipations, uncontested divorces and simple traffic infractions can all usually be resolved DIY, if you don't mind performing your own research and spending a few mornings in court.  Criminal law, on the other hand, is not one of these areas.  

The 6th Amendment to the US Constitution guarantees the right to counsel of one's choice.  That includes the right to act as your own counsel.  Just because you have the right to do something, though, doesn't always mean that you should.  Representing yourself in criminal court is a terrible idea and there is really no good reason to attempt it.  The stakes are too high and the game is too complicated.  Abraham Lincoln even supposedly said, "Whoever represents himself has a fool for a client."  

In any criminal case, the prosecutor is a highly-trained professional.  This person graduated from law school, passed the bar exam, received extensive on-the-job training, and has experience conducting many, many jury trials before yours.  The prosecutor understands the rules of evidence, how to effectively examine a witness, how to make compelling opening / closing statements, and how to properly object if you attempt to inject some inappropriate argument.  This person is trying to convict you and possibly send you to jail.  Without a robust defense, the prosecutor will run wild on you.  

As your own attorney, you will be expected to comply with all the same rules and procedures as the professional prosecutor.  The judge will not grant you any slack or give you any extra time to prepare.  The court will also not give you any legal advice or assistance.  

Even lawyers don't represent themselves when they get into trouble; they hire other lawyers.  The dangers of self-representation are not limited to the defendant's lack of knowledge or experience.  Acting as your own lawyer is so hazardous because it's difficult to analyze your own case objectively.  Emotion will cloud your judgment.  You will see the evidence through your own prism and you may fall into the trap of assuming that the jury sees it the same way.  Tunnel vision can distort your perspective and distract from the important issues.  A disinterested set of eyes can review the facts and help craft a narrative that serves your defense more effectively.  

Cost is not a compelling reason to represent yourself in criminal court.  Among other things, part of an attorney's job is to help the client avoid or reduce expensive fines and restitution.  Sometimes, we can even pay for ourselves by saving the client more than our fee.  Our firm is very flexible with payment plans, and most other local law offices will work to accommodate almost anyone's budget.  If money is really an issue, though, the Public Defender will represent a defendant at no cost.  The Orange County Public Defender's Office has an outstanding reputation and their attorneys are all very capable.  Any defendant would have much better prospects in the hands of the OCPD than in representing himself.  

Finally, if you represent yourself and you do a terrible job, you cannot sue for malpractice or complain about "ineffective assistance of counsel" on appeal.  You have nobody to blame but yourself.  

I have never seen anyone successfully represent him or herself in criminal court.  I love to sit in and watch these cases when I have time, but it's kind of like seeing a professional boxer spar with an elderly, disabled person.  The prosecutor sticks and moves effortlessly around the ring, while the hapless defendant argues with the judge and stumbles through waves of objections.  

A pro per trial is scheduled to start at the Fullerton Courthouse on 6/12/23, and I plan to observe part of it.  A local woman is accused of various traffic infractions.  After being stopped, she allegedly tore up the ticket, resisted the police and slapped an officer.  I will post a summary here, so check back for updates. 

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

Thanks for reading. 

Orange County Criminal Defense Attorney 

Updated 6/14/23:  Well, that was quick.  The pro per trial in the Fullerton Courthouse (mentioned above) went exactly as I predicted -- it was an unmitigated disaster for the defendant.  Throughout the 2-day trial, she argued with the judge and bumbled through an onslaught of objections.  She repeatedly attempted to inject improper arguments and referred to matters that had been expressly excluded.  Her "evidence" was deemed inadmissible and the judge repeatedly warned her about her decorum.  Inexplicably, and on more than one occasion, she attempted to cite the historical case of "Marbury v. Madison" (1803), which famously established the doctrine of "judicial review" (the idea that courts have the power to declare various laws unconstitutional -- a bedrock of the American justice system, but utterly irrelevant in this case).  

To recap, this case involved some traffic tickets and one woman's refusal to simply sign the citation.  According to the arresting officer, the defendant tore up the ticket, threw it onto the ground, refused his commands, and slapped him.  The jury deliberated for less than an hour before returning "guilty" verdicts on all counts.  The defendant was immediately remanded into the custody of the sheriff. 

Sentencing was scheduled for this morning.  The judge also set the case for an "Order to Show Cause re: Contempt" -- a hearing to determine whether or not the defendant should be additionally punished for her repeated failures to comply with the court's rules during the trial.  Bail was set at $15,000.  Defendant posted bond and was released overnight.  

Judge Thompson sentenced the defendant to serve 20 days in jail, but allowed her to apply for house arrest.  He also set her fines at $2,377.47, ordered her to complete 8 hours of trash pick-up and placed her on informal probation for one year.  He set sanctions at $100 for her repeated violations of court decorum. 

Expunge Your Criminal Record in California

Having an old criminal record can have a significant impact on one's life. Old convictions can prevent individuals from finding employment, housing, and educational opportunities, among other things. Luckily, California offers individuals several different options to reduce the severity of old charges, to dismiss cases, and to have various records hidden from public view.

Our office has been handling California expungement cases from start to finish for over a decade.  We can take care of the entire process with just a few pieces of information from the client, even if the client lives somewhere outside of California.  If you've been thinking about cleaning up your record but you're intimidated by the court system, send a quick email and let us take care of everything.  

One of the most significant benefits of expunging a criminal record relates to employment. Many potential employers conduct background checks on job applicants, and a criminal record can be a significant barrier to starting a new career. Employers in California, however, are legally prohibited from discriminating against applicants whose old cases have been expunged. Once your expungement has been approved by the court, then the old case "never happened" for employment purposes.

Expunging a criminal record can also help anyone seeking housing. Landlords may conduct background checks on potential tenants, and a criminal record can make it challenging to find a place to live. It's hard enough to find a good place already.

Additionally, expunging a criminal record can help students pursue educational opportunities. Many colleges, universities and graduate schools conduct background checks on applicants, and a criminal record can be an insurmountable hurdle to admission.

Expunging a criminal record can also have psychological benefits. Individuals with criminal records may feel a sense of shame or embarrassment about their past. Expunging a record can help alleviate these feelings and allow individuals to move forward with their lives without the constant reminder of their past mistakes.

Anyone with a felony conviction is prohibited from owning or possessing firearms for life. In some cases, though, old felonies can be reduced to misdemeanors. An expungement does not restore gun rights by itself, but a reduction may. Once a charge is reduced in severity from a felony to a misdemeanor, the old charge is considered to be a misdemeanor for all purposes.

Finally, expunging a criminal record can also have societal benefits. When individuals are able to find employment, housing, and educational opportunities, they are less likely to engage in criminal behavior in the future. This can lead to a reduction in crime rates and a safer community for everyone.

If you or a loved one has questions about cleaning up a criminal record in California, call us for a free attorney consultation. 714 449 3335. Ask for John. Our office is located in Orange County, but we serve the entire state of California.

Thanks for reading.

Orange County Expungement Lawyer