What to Do if You're Pulled Over for a DUI

If you are stopped by police on suspicion of DUI, your behavior and demeanor can often determine whether or not you will spend a night in jail.  Even if you are arrested, knowing how to interact with police can make a big difference for the outcome of your case in court and with the DMV.

Do Not Talk Yourself Into Trouble

The most common mistake I see clients make is to admit they've been drinking or using drugs.  It is a crime to lie to police, but that doesn't mean that you're legally obligated to talk yourself into trouble.  You can (and should) politely refuse to answer any questions whenever you're being grilled by police.  Virtually nothing you can say will lead to less trouble than you're already in.  If you start talking and your speech sounds slurred or if your breath smells like alcohol, those observations will be noted in the arrest report.  If you admit that you've taken some prescription drugs or consumed marijuana (even medical marijuana), you will almost certainly be taken to the police station for a blood test.

Do Not Voluntarily Submit to Field Sobriety Tests

Field Sobriety Tests (FSTs, or the "roadside Olympics") are a series of standardized tasks that police use to evaluate drivers who are suspected of DUI.  Common FSTs include the "Walk and Turn" test (where subjects are instructed to walk heel-to-toe for 9 steps along an imaginary line, pivot and walk back), the "Rhomberg" test (where subjects close their eyes and tilt their head back without swaying from side to side), and the "Finger to Nose" test (what it sounds like).

Unless you are currently on probation for DUI, you are not legally obligated to participate in any of these tests.  No matter how well you perform on FSTs, the arrest report will always say that you "appeared disoriented", you "had difficultly following instructions", you were "unsteady on your feet", etc.  Those tests not intended to be "passed", they're intended to give the arresting officer plenty of reasons to form a subjective opinion that you were too impaired to drive safely.  Of course, there are plenty of reasons that a perfectly sober person might perform poorly on those tests.  They're not easy.

Do Not Submit to a Breathalyzer Before You Are Arrested

The police officer might ask if you want to voluntarily take a roadside breath test.  Again, you have no obligation to take the Preliminary Alcohol Screen (PAS) unless you are currently on probation for DUI.   Don't do it.  After you are arrested, you must provide a sample for chemical testing, but not before.

Breath Test or Blood Test?

If you are arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence of alcohol, then (and only then) you must submit to your choice of either a breath test or a blood test.  If one test is unavailable, you must take the other.  If you are suspected of driving under the influence of drugs, then you have no choice; you must take a blood test.  Breath machines cannot test for drugs other than alcohol.

The police will read you an admonishment to specifically warn you about your obligation to provide a chemical sample for testing.  If you are lawfully arrested on suspicion of DUI, the police read the appropriate warning, and you refuse to submit to a breath or blood test, your driver's license will automatically be suspended for one year.  The police may even obtain a warrant to take your blood by force if necessary.

If you are given the choice, is it better to take a breath test or a blood test?  In my opinion there are advantages and disadvantages to each.  The blood test will preserve a sample that can be retested at a private facility if you disagree with the analysis that the county crime lab provides.  Retesting that sample may reveal several different reasons that the county's toxicology report is unreliable.  If the blood is contaminated with bacteria or improper preservatives, your attorney might have a good argument to have the sample thrown out entirely.  On the other hand, a blood test will also reveal drugs other than alcohol that can form the basis for a DUI.  If you take prescription medicine, sleep aids or if you have consumed marijuana within about 5 hours before driving, prosecutors may file additional charges.

The breath test does not retain a sample for retesting and it will not reveal other drugs that might be present in your blood.  There are a handful of reasons that a breath test might be unreliable.  Your attorney may challenge the machine's maintenance and calibration, or he might argue that the officer who administered the test failed to follow the manufacturer's instructions.

If you have recently consumed ANY drugs other than alcohol (even legal, prescription drugs) and you are given the option, I would personally opt for a breath test.  If you have NOT taken any other drugs, you might choose the blood test.

To Post Bail or Not to Post Bail?

If you are arrested for a first-time DUI and nobody got injured, you will usually be released on your own recognizance within about 12 hours.  You will be required to sign a "Promise to Appear" in court on a specific date for your arraignment, usually scheduled about 6-8 weeks after your arrest.

If you have previous convictions for DUI, if your case involved a collision, or if you refuse to sign the "Promise to Appear", you might not be quickly released on your own recognizance.  Bail for a first DUI is usually $2,500 - 5,000, but it can be much higher if you are accused of causing an injury.

After You Are Released

You will be given several pieces of paper when you are released from custody.  The pink page is your temporary driver's license.  It is valid for 30 days.  Once that temporary license expires, your license will automatically be suspended.  You have a right, though, to conduct a hearing with the DMV to determine whether or not your license should be suspended before your criminal case is resolved.  You must call and request that hearing within 10 days of your arrest.  If your hearing is scheduled more than 30 days in the future, you may continue driving until you receive the results from that hearing.

A private attorney can handle everything with both the court and the DMV.  If you plan to wait more than 10 days to hire an attorney, though, you should request your DMV hearing immediately.  Once you eventually hire an attorney, he or she can contact the DMV to reschedule that hearing for some time when he or she is available.

If you or a loved one has been arrested for DUI in Orange County, call us for a free attorney consultation.  714 449 3335.  Ask for John.

Thanks for reading.

Orange County DUI 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 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

Driving Under the Influence of Drugs in Orange County

The Orange County District Attorney is aggressively cracking down on cases involving driving under the influence of drugs (DUID).

There's a lot of bad information out there regarding DUID cases in California.  Some of my clients are surprised to learn that they can be arrested for driving under the influence of any drug or combination of drugs that affect their ability to drive a car safely.  That includes legal drugs, illegal drugs, prescription drugs, medical marijuana, chemotherapy drugs, sleep aids, even NyQuil.

Everyone knows that the "magic number" with alcohol is 0.08%.  If you drive a car while your blood alcohol concentration is 0.08% or greater, you are guilty of DUI.  With other drugs, though, there is no clearly defined limit in California that tells us how "impaired" is too impaired to drive.  To be guilty of driving under the influence of drugs, prosecutors must prove that you were intoxicated to such a degree that you could not operate a vehicle with the skill and care of a normal, sober driver.  That can be complicated.

If you are arrested on suspicion of drunk driving, you will be given the choice of either submitting to a blood test or a breath test.  If officers suspect that you are impaired by drugs, though, you must give a blood sample (a breath test will not detect drugs other than alcohol).  The Orange County Crime Lab will screen your blood sample for 5 drugs: alcohol, THC (both active delta-9 THC and its metabolites), opiates, cocaine, amphetamine and benzodiazepines (prescription drugs like Xanax).  The presence of one or more of these drugs, though, does not necessarily prove that you are dangerously impaired or guilty of a DUI.  Many drugs have a safe, therapeutic application. Someone who suffers from ADD, for example, might be a safer, more attentive driver after he takes his Adderall.  The fact that he tests positive for amphetamine, then, does not prove that he is dangerously impaired by drugs.

Marijuana is an especially tricky one.  Most people have heard that THC is detectable in the blood for weeks after use.  This is only partly true.  When you smoke weed, delta-9 THC is the chemical that actually causes you to feel "high".  After you consume delta-9 THC, your body metabolizes the drug and produces a chemical called "carboxy THC" (COOH-THC).  Carboxy THC has no psychoactive effect, but it may remain traceable for days or weeks.  Carboxy THC, then, may be evidence of recent marijuana use, but it means nothing if we're trying to determine whether or not a subject is impaired at the moment.  When the crime lab analyzes your blood sample, their report will show your levels of both delta-9 THC (the stuff that is currently making you high), and COOH-THC (evidence of past use).  In some cases, high levels of COOH-THC can actually support your defense.  If you are an experienced user, you might have a high tolerance for the drug.  In that case, even high levels of active delta-9 THC might not necessarily prove that you were dangerously stoned at the time of driving.

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

Thanks for reading.

Orange County 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

I Lost in Restraining Order Court. Can I Get Another Hearing?

You generally get one bite of the apple in restraining order court. This is why I'm always stressing the importance of showing up to court prepared for your hearing. Part of effectively preparing for your day before the judge includes speaking with a qualified, local attorney as early as possible. Your attorney understands the rules of evidence, how to issue subpoenas, how to properly examine witnesses, and how to effectively present a case in court. You wouldn't operate on yourself; don't try to represent yourself in court.

If, despite your best efforts, you haven't had an opportunity to thoroughly prepare before your court hearing, there's some good news -- you are entitled to at least one free continuance. Maybe you haven't been able to save up the money to retain a qualified lawyer. Maybe you're still trying to locate and interview prospective witnesses. If you need more time for any reason, all you have to do is show up and ask the judge nicely for 2-4 more weeks to get your ducks into a row. The court will give you as much time as you reasonably need to prepare your defense.

That being said, there are a handful of good reasons to request a new hearing if a restraining order is granted against you. First, though, you need to understand a few things that are NOT good reasons to request a new hearing:

I Wasn't Ready 

The court does NOT want to hear that you were simply unprepared. As mentioned above, you were entitled to a continuance before the hearing if you weren't ready to go forward. If you wanted more time, you only had to ask for it. If you announced that you were ready to litigate, though, it's too late to request a postponement now. That ship has sailed.

I'm Not a Lawyer

It is also NOT effective to argue that your hearing was unfair because you aren't a lawyer and you didn't understand the rules. If you choose to represent yourself in court, you will be held to the same standards as a professionally trained and licensed attorney. You will not receive any special considerations or preferential treatment if you appear without a lawyer.

The Petitioner Lied and the Judge Believed It

Finally, you CANNOT argue that the restraining order should be overturned because you disagree with the judge's ruling. Again, the point of the hearing was to present relevant facts and evidence -- that was your chance. If you showed up in court without any evidence and unprepared to explain / deny / excuse the petitioner's evidence, reread the previous paragraphs.

After hearing the evidence, the judge had discretion to determine whether or not harassment has occurred. If the judge heard the facts and weighed the evidence fairly, in accordance with the law, then the issues are settled. The court will not reconsider any new arguments, except...

Motion to Reconsider a Restraining Order

The Respondent MAY ask the court for a new hearing if there are some "new or different facts, circumstances or law" since the first hearing. If the situation has changed since you last appeared in court, you may appear before a judge and explain why the restraining order against you is no longer necessary or warranted.

In a motion to reconsider a restraining order, the judge does not want to hear a better version of the arguments you've already made. Instead, the court wants to hear something new that wasn't available at the last hearing.

Here's the kicker, though: a motion to reconsider a restraining order must be filed within 10 days after the respondent is served with the original order. This is why motions to reconsider are difficult -- you're required to prove some "change in circumstances", but you only have 10 days to do so. Since circumstances are unlikely to change that drastically in 10 days, motions to reconsider restraining orders can be an uphill battle.

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

Thanks for reading.

Orange County Restraining Order 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

Is Civil Disobedience a Defense to Criminal Charges?

With everything in the news these days, there's been a lot of talk about "civil disobedience", free speech, the right to protest, and the 1st Amendment.  Before you get yourself arrested, please take a moment to read this article.  Make sure that you understand your rights and, more importantly, the limits of those rights.  Then call my office.

The 1st Amendment to the US Constitution guarantees the right to free speech.  The government may (almost) never punish you simply for expressing an unpopular opinion.  The content of your speech is virtually sacrosanct under American law, no matter how offensive.  In this country, you are free to deny the holocaust or to make racially offensive slurs.  You might lose friends or even your job, but the state may not sanction you for saying stupid things. 

The time, place and manner of your speech is another story, though.  The government may constitutionally restrict when, where and how you express yourself, as long as they have a good reason to do so.  The police may not arrest you simply for yelling, "F*ck the police!", but they absolutely may arrest you if you scream it repeatedly late at night in a residential area (or if you torch a police car, block an intersection, disrupt traffic, damage property, etc., even if those actions are political speech).

So turn out, protest, make signs, and yell whatever you want.  But please don't block the freeway or light anything on fire.

If you choose to engage in some civil disobedience, be advised that "civil disobedience" is not a defense to criminal charges.  The term "civil disobedience" was coined in the middle of the 19th Century by Henry David Thoreau.  Thoreau had served a night in jail for refusing to pay a tax, in protest of the Mexican-American War.  He was a staunch opponent of the war and of slavery.  In his famous essay, Thoreau argued that men have a moral responsibility to resist unjust enactments, and to break the law if necessary.  He also emphasized, though, that they must be prepared to accept the consequences of their unlawful behavior.  Thoreau willingly served his time in jail and he never argued for lenience or claimed that his actions were protected by the 1st Amendment.

If you or a loved one has questions about civil disobedience or the 1st Amendment, call us for a free attorney consultation. (714) 449-3335.  Ask for John.

Thanks for reading.

Fullerton Criminal Defense Attorney