Archive for the 'Criminal Defense Law' Category

Rapper Lil Wayne – real name Dwayne Carter – recently pleaded guilty to attempted gun possession in front of Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Charles Solomon.

He pleaded not guilty to the charge of criminal possession of a weapon because he claims the gun was not his.

The Associated Press reported that Lil Wayne received one year in prison for his conviction. If he would have been convicted of criminal possession he would have faced three-and–a-half years in prison, which is the mandatory sentence in the state of New York.

Lil Wayne was arrested back in July 2008 for possession of a .40 caliber pistol. Police pulled over the rapper’s bus after it left the Manhattan concert venue, The Beacon Theater.

Police claimed they smelled marijuana smoke coming from the bus when it was parked in the lot of the venue. The officers made everyone exit the bus, and then they found Lil Wayne in the back.

Police stated that as they approached the rapper, he discarded a Louis Vuitton bag containing the gun. Lil Wayne is not licensed in the state of New York to carry a gun.

Lil Wayne’s defense attorney, Stacey Richman, claimed the gun did not belong to her client but to one of his associates who was willing to take full responsibility and ownership of the gun.

Richman continued to state the prosecutors allegedly used faulty forensics to investigate the case. There was a very tiny sample of cells taken from the trigger that match Lil Wayne’s genetic profile.

During the court proceedings both sides argued to determine if this small sample was evidence enough to link the gun to him.

The Manhattan District Attorney’s office states the small amount of DNA cells linked the gun to Lil Wayne, and they believe this method of DNA testing is accurate, but the defense disputes the accuracy.

Lil Wayne is also facing trial in Arizona on felony drug possession and a weapons charge. He was stopped and arrested at a border patrol checkpoint in2008. He pleaded not guilty to these charges brought against him.

His slew of legal troubles may or may not have any effect on his music career besides the obvious that he will be unable to tour for the year he is in prison. At this point he is still a popular artist.

His court date for his New York arrest is December 15 of this year - the same day his new album “Rebirth” is scheduled to be released.

In Birmingham, Ala., Mayor Larry Langford was recently accused of allegedly taking bribes from investment bankers in exchange for money to excel their businesses, according to a USA Today article.

The accusations are pointed toward Langford’s time spent as President of Jefferson County Commission from 2002 to 2006. He later ran for mayor in 2007 and – with his background as a television news reporter – won by a landslide.

During his four year period as the President, Langford allegedly supplied $7.1 million in swap bonds with Blount Parrish and Co. in exchange for bribes which consisted of cash, clothes and jewelry.

The “deals” created a financial crisis for the state of Alabama, in addition to the economic credit downfall.
He has been charged with multiple counts of bribery, conspiracy, fraud, money laundering and tax evasions. If Langford gets convicted on any one of these felony charges alone, he could face not only jail time, but removal from office.

Investment banker Bill Blount pleaded guilty to paying bribes to the Mayor along with Lobbyist Al LaPierre who claimed to play the middle-man role in the bribes, sometimes exchanging money between the two other men.

According to a CNN article, U.S. Attorney Alice Martin said the three men conspired to solicit and to accept bribes; and to use influence and position to ensure that Blount and his company, Blount Parrish Inc., was involved in Jefferson County’s bonds and swap transactions related to multibillion-dollar sewer debt.

In his plea agreement, Blount will serve as a witness for the prosecution. He admitted to bribing Mayor Langford to commit to the deals that made his company millions richer.

Langford claims the so called “bribes” were really an exchange of gifts between friends and that the charges brought against him was by a Republican prosecutor to target against Alabama Democrats for political reasons.

Jim Spearman who is the executive director of the Alabama Democratic Party said that Republican prosecutors do appear to target Democrats, but he also stated that Langford has not been associated with the Democratic Party for many years.

His trial will be held 55 miles outside Birmingham in Tuscaloosa, Ala., because of all the publicity already surrounding the case. This is to ensure that there will be no biases or effect on the trial itself.

All three men could face fines and prison time. They could face a maximum of 10 years for each count of bribery and money laundering; 20 years for fraud; five years for conspiracy; and three years for each tax count.

Langford himself has 60 counts charged against him.

Richard Heene, the father of the boy who was allegedly trapped inside the helium balloon that was in flight for two hours before crash-landing 40 miles from home, is now under investigation for fabricating the entire event, according to a Wall Street Journal article.

The balloon stunt was allegedly planned to help the family land a reality television show - the family has already appeared on the TV series Wife Swap.

Colorado officials are planning to press criminal charges against the boy’s parents. Larimer County Sheriff Jim Alderden confirmed that after investigation, the balloon situation is believed to be a hoax - though the family has denied it.

Among the potential charges the Heenes have coming their way are two felony charges - attempt to influence a public servant and contributing to the delinquency of a minor. The parents could face up to six years in jail and over $500,000 in fines, the Wall Street Journal reported.

In an interview with Larry King, Falcon Heene - the “balloon boy” - said his parents told him to hide. The boy was also recorded saying, “You guys said that, um, we did this for the show.”

An alleged bank robber in California had second thoughts about his misdeed — so he handed over $1,200 to a parish priest after confessing.

His remorse must have ended there, as he has not turned himself into police, ABC 7 in San Fransisco reports.

Police say a man in his mid-20s, wearing a white sweatshirt and a fake goatee, entered the Patelco Credit Union in Walnut Cree, Calif., last week and handed a note to the teller demanding money saying he had a gun. He fled on foot with $1,200.

Sunday night, a man confessed the crime to a priest at St. John Vianney’s Catholic church, and reportedly give back the cash. The priest called the police after the man left, and turned over the money.

The man did not give his name to the priest, but even if he had, the priest would not be obligated to tell police, as confessions are considered privileged communications.

Police are still searching for their robbery suspect.

A convicted murderer in Ohio is being released from prison pending a new trial after his defense attorneys successfully argued that juror curiosity violated his right to a fair trial, according to WLWT news.

Ryan Widmer of Lebanon, Ohio, was serving 15 years to life for the murder of his wife, Sarah. Prosecutors say he drowned her in the bathtub, while the defense maintained that her drowning was accident. Widmer allegedly found his wife, called paramedics, drained the tub and attempted CPR.

A key point the prosecution made was that when paramedics arrived, Sarah Widmer’s body was dry, and her hair was damp, a finding that they maintained did not support Ryan Widmer’s timeline.

The defense countered that argument by calling forensic pathologist Dr. Michael Balko, who testified that a body can dry completely in such a short period of time, and that he himself had air dried that morning in only seven minutes.

This is where jurors took matters into there own hands.

According to an appeal motion filed by the defense, two jurors attempted similar experiments at home, and shared those findings with other jurors, which in turn influenced their verdict, WLWT reports.

Widmer’s defense team says that this qualifies as testimony, which was not available for cross-examination — a glaring violation of Widmer’s due process rights.

Presiding Judge Neal Bronson agreed, and granted Widmer a new trial. Widmer is currently released on a $1 million bond, and will be monitored by GPS following his release.

The Senate has passed a controversial bill that could expand the definition of hate crime.

The bill extends hate-crime protection to include crime committed because of the victim’s sexual orientation and gender identity, according to The New York Times. A version of the measure has been considered by Congress in Washington DC since 1999.

The bill also allows federal authorities to intervene in cases where local agencies are not pursuing a suspected hate crime.

The hate crime expansion, named after Matthew Shepard, a Wyoming man brutally killed in 1998 because he was gay, has drawn criticism from conservative group who worry that it might infringe on religious speech protections.

These critics are afraid that, because hate crime covers hate speech, conservative preachers could be prosecuted for sermons that call homosexuality evil.

Others were critical that the bill was attached to a Pentagon spending bill, and was not allowed proper time for debate.

President Obama is excepted to sign the bill.

A teen in Washington state who killed a woman in a hunting accident was sentenced to 30 days in a juvenile intentional center, according to NBC affiliate KHQ.

Tyler Kales, who was 14 at the time, was bear hunting with his brother on Sauk Mountain north of Seattle. According to his own testimony, in the fog that covered the mountains, Kales mistook 54-year-old Pamela Almil for a bear. He fired a shot that struck Almil in the head and killed her.

Kales was found guilty of second-degree manslaughter on June 2. However, at his sentencing, Judge Susan Cook acquitted Kales of the more serious first-degree manslaughter charge, finding did not act recklessly in the shooting.

Washington statute defines Second-Degree Manslaughter, a class-B felony, as:

A person is guilty of manslaughter in the second degree when, with criminal negligence, he causes the death of another person.

Cook sentenced Kales to 30 days in a juvenile detention center, 12 months under supervision with counseling, and 120 hours of community service — 40 of which must be teaching others about hunting safety.

Kales had taken hunting safety classes since the age of 9, and was legally permitted to hunt without adult supervision in the state of Washington, according to a Seattle Time article from last year.

A subway trolley operator in Boston has been charged with gross negligence following a collision in May.

Aiden Quinn, 24, admitted to investigators he was texting seconds before the collision, according to CNN.

A news release from the office of District Attorney Daniel Conley said, “as Quinn was texting, he ran through yellow and red warning lights at about 25 mph within the subway tunnel. Quinn’s train then struck the two-car train ahead of him, which was stopped at another red light and had its brake lights on.”

Sixty-two people were injured in the crash, which caused an estimated $9 million in damages.

If convicted of the charges, Quinn could face a criminal sentence of up to three years in a Massachusetts prison and fined up to $5,000.

Quinn’s defense attorney, Michelle Menken, argued the criminal charge is baseless because there was no criminal intent.

The National Transportation Safety Board ruled that the cause of the crash was human error, after finding that the brakes, lights and other safety mechanisms functioned perfectly.

California’s Supreme Court upheld a provision that allows crimes committed while a minor to affect sentencing under the state’s controversial Three-Strikes law, according to the San Francisco Gate.

Under the three-strikes law, any second felony conviction receives twice the normal sentence; any third felony conviction receives an automatic life sentence. The court’s decision means that even if one or both previous felony was committed while the offender was under 18, it still counts as a strike.

The provision was already part of  the California law, but had been challenged after a district court heard the case of San Jose defendant, Vince Nguyen, who was sentenced in 2005 to 32 months for being a felon in possession of a firearm — twice the normal sentence.

Nguyen received a previous felony in 1999 for aggravated assault when he was 16, according to the S.F. Gate article.

In his appeal, Nguyen’s defense attorney argued that because juvenile court cases are decided by a judge and not a jury, allowing a juvenile record to affect a later trial violates his client’s right to due process.

In the decision for the 6-1 ruling, Justice Marvin Baxter wrote that juveniles in California have “every substantial safeguard required in an adult criminal trial except the right to trial by jury,” including the right to be convicted beyond a reasonable doubt.

Criminal defendants can now question the validity of lab results in court, thanks to a recent ruling by the US Supreme Court.

In a 5-4 ruling, the court said that allowing prosecutors to submit forensic evidence without questioning by the defense is a violation of Sixth Amendment right to face one’s accuser, according to The New York Times.

The decision invalidates the theory of neutral scientific evidence.

“Dispensing with confrontation because testimony is obviously reliable is akin to dispensing with jury trial because a defendant is obviously guilty,” Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for the majority.

The court heard the case Luis Melendez-Diaz of Boston, who was arrested for drug distribution & trafficking, along with two other men.

After their arrest, police found 19 plastic bags containing a white powder in the back seat of their vehicle. A lab report identified the powder as cocaine, which was entered into evidence used to convict Melendez-Diaz, according to the Christian Science Monitor.

The decision came in the wake of a wave of scandals at crime laboratories that included hundreds of tainted cases in Michigan, Texas and West Virginia.

Now, a defense attorney will be able to call the lab technician for cross-examination and potentially raise question to the legitimacy of the analysis.