Los Angeles Criminal Lawyers Blog

Many of our clients who have been charged with a Driving Under the Influence charge, claim that they did not become intoxicated at their own volition. Many argue that someone tampered with their drink, and added more alcohol or possibly even a drug that led them to become intoxicated.

This is a defense that has to be presented carefully. It requires strong evidence that supports the argument being made. Prosecution will prepare a strong rebuttal in each situation, but an experienced San Diego DUI Lawyer will be able to anticipate the potential arguments and will have a powerful defense prepared in your favor.

To prove that there was involuntary intoxication, one of the strongest types of evidence that may be presented is witness testimony. If a person can provide testimony that they directly observed someone pouring alcohol or drugs into your drink, without your knowledge, your case may have a strong defense. However, there are several concerns by prosecutors when proving a criminal case through the use of witness testimony.

One of the concerns will be who the witness is. If the witness is a close friend, family member or a significant other, the prosecutor will present the argument that the person might be biased, and their testimony may not be credible. If the person is someone you are close to, their testimony will likely be presented in a light most favorable to your case. In these situations, testimony will be taken as evidence, but the Prosecutor will do their best to discredit or weaken the evidence.

If the witness testifying is a stranger, someone who was at the scene and has no previous relationship with the person being charged, their testimony will be given more weight. Similarly, if it is a direct observation by a bystander, it will provide strong evidence for the defense.

Other forms of evidence that may be presented are surveillance tapes, which will also be strong evidence. Weaker forms of evidence can be circumstantial evidence such as possibly a receipt indicating that non alcoholic drinks were bought. However, circumstantial evidence is difficult to find in cases regarding involuntary intoxication and may not be the strongest support for the Criminal Defense attorney's argument.

A defense for cases that involve intoxication is difficult to prove. The evidence is available, but even when presented may not be as strong as it should be. It is the job of the Criminal Defense Lawyer to prepare an argument that is powerful and gather evidence that cannot be doubted in Court. If it can be proven that intoxication was involuntary and against a person's will, then there is a key component of a criminal case missing. Each criminal case must be the result of a person's own volition. Proving involuntary intoxication may lead to a case being dismissed or reduced.

When a person is arrested for a Drug charge in Southern California they could possibly face a conviction and jail time. Any drug charge on a person's record could cause future issues with job and school applications. It is in the person's best interest to do all that they can and utilize all available defenses to assure that the charge is reduced or dismissed.

Many of our clients are not guilty of the crime they are being charged with, and it is simply a matter of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Many of our clients inform us that the drugs that are found in their possession are not theirs, but a friend's or an acquaintance.

For example, lets' say that Dan and Frank go to the beach and Frank drives. Unbeknownst to Frank, Dan has brought marijuana in a bag and put it in Frank's glove compartment. After the beach, Dan forgets to take his marijuana with him and leaves it in the car. A couple days later Frank gets pulled over for a routine traffic violation and when he reaches for his insurance, the bag of marijuana falls out and officers arrest him for possession of a controlled substance.

How does Frank prove that the marijuana is not his, and it was a friend's? This is a difficult defense to argue, because it is difficult to present evidence that will make your argument strong. Frank must prove to prosecutor's that he did not know the marijuana was in his car, and he must show that it wasn't his.

In certain situations, a witness may be able to testify that will make the defense stronger. It may be that Dan is willing to testify that the marijuana was his and that Frank did not know that it was in the car. However, that would require that Dan be charged, and depending on how good of friends Dan and Frank are, it may not be an option.
In other situations there may be a third party that would be willing to testify. In the previous example, lets say that Tom was in the backseat. Tom had just met Frank and was a friend of Dan's and saw Dan put the marijuana in the glove compartment. If Tom were to testify in Court that he saw Dan bring the marijuana into the car and put it in the glove compartment, and that Dan was known to smoke it might strengthen Frank's defense .

The nature of the relationship the witness has with the person being charged will play a strong role. If the witness and the charged person are good friends, it may cast doubt on the credibility of the testimony and Prosecution will argue that it is weak evidence since it may be biased. In the hypothetical situation of Tom, the testimony may be somewhat stronger because Tom is testifying against his friend, on behalf of a person he does not know too well. A knowledgeable San Diego Drug Possession Lawyer will play up this aspect and present evidence that wills strongly support their defense.

There is an extensive portion of the California Penal Code dedicated to theft offenses. There are many different types of theft cases, and leaves room for many different charges under the code. One of the elements required for a person to be convicted of a theft charge is that there must be specific intent. Specific intent means that the person charged with San Diego theft, must have the intent to deprive a person of their property permanently. If this intent is not there, then the person may have a strong defense to the theft violation.

For example, Dan is studying at the library. He notices that someone's laptop is unattended and sitting on a desk. He picks up the laptop, puts it in his bag and walks away. Later at home, he deletes the files and programs on the laptop and puts on his own. He puts in his own passwords and information. In this situation, the evidence indicates that Dan had every intent to take the laptop and not return it. By deleting all the programs and installing his own, there is strong support that Dan would not be returning the laptop to the owner. If Dan used the specific intent defense in court, it would likely be denied.

In comparison, David is studying at the library. He notices that someone has left their laptop unattended on the desk. David is doing some work and needs to look up something for him to be able to continue with his studying. He walks over to the laptop and looks up something using the internet browser. He does not move the laptop and after looking up what he wants, he leaves the laptop as it was and closes what he was looking at only. Additionally, he leaves a note on the desk telling the owner that he used the laptop just to look up something briefly and apologizes for the inconvenience and thanks them for allowing him to use their laptop.

In the second scenario, there is no proof that David intended to deprive the owner of the laptop. In fact, there is strong evidence to the contrary. The fact that the laptop was never moved, the note that was left acknowledging the proper owner and thanking them for the use and possibly testimony from the owner themselves that it did not seem like David had any intention of stealing the laptop.

The major problem with the Specific Intent Defense is that it may be difficult to prove. In the above hypothetical scenarios, there is an exaggeration of facts which make proving the defense easier. However, in many cases the line is not so clear. Testimony may be biased and lack credibility, and often circumstantial evidence is available.

An experienced San Diego Theft Lawyer has handled thousands of theft cases and knows which evidence to present and how so that the defense is powerful. The attorney can assess the facts of your case and determine what the best option will be, keeping in mind the most important goal of having the theft case reduced or dismissed.

When a person is charged under California Penal Code §417, they are being charged with brandishing a weapon, gun or firearm.

The statute is divided into several different elements that must be met in order for a person who is charged to be convicted. Each element must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The person being charged must draw or exhibit a deadly weapon, or a firearm. This not only means that a person could have the weapon in plain sight for others to see, but also that they take it out.

The exhibition or drawing of the weapon or firearm must be in the presence of another person. The actions of the person being charged must be done in a rude, angry or threatening manner.

Additionally, under California Penal Code §417, those that are found unlawfully using a weapon or firearm in a fight or quarrel may also be charged as brandishing a weapon, gun or firearm.

The prosecutor must demonstrate to the Court that the person being charged has met each element and is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. For example, lets say David goes out to a bar with friends. He has just bought a new hunting knife and wants to show his friends. He takes it out of his pocket and opens it up showing his friend the blade and the handle.

David may be charged with brandishing a knife, but the chances of him being convicted are not likely. While David did have a knife, it is arguable if he "drew" it out, and it was hardly done in a angry, rude or threatening manner. He was merely showing it to his friend and it was not in an unlawful manner done during a fight or quarrel.

Similarly, in another scenario, David goes into a bar and gets into an argument with another patron. In a fit of anger, David takes his knife out of his pocket and waves it around, telling the other patron that he would use the knife if provoked. In this scenario, David will be charged with brandishing a knife and will likely be convicted. He was using the knife unlawfully during a quarrel. It was taken out in anger and was meant to be threatening. Unlike the first scenario, he was not merely showing it to a friend, he was either intending to use it, or threatening to use it.

An experienced Los Angeles Criminal Defense lawyer can help prepare a strong argument against that of the Prosecutor's. Self Defense can be a strong defense to a charge under this statute, and must be proven in order for the charges to be dismissed. Additionally, if an attorney can demonstrate to the Court that each element is not met, there will have to be a reduction in charges, or a dismissal. Preparing the most powerful defense will require experience and knowledge that can only come from handling thousands of similar cases in the past.

Self defense is a defense that may be applicable in certain Southern California assault cases. Whether the defense will apply depends on the specific facts of the case. If a knowledgeable San Diego Criminal Defense attorney is able to argue self defense successfully, then the case may be completely dismissed.

The evaluation of whether self defense will be influential will depend on certain factors that must be met in an assault. If all the elements are not met, then self defense will not apply and the case will go.

It is the prosecutor's job to demonstrate to the Court that the person charged is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. In an assault case, they must prove each element beyond a reasonable doubt before a person can be found guilty and charged. They will do this by presenting evidence to the Judge and in certain cases, the jury. Evidence may include an officer's report, witness testimony, photographs and any other evidence that was gathered from the scene.

When a defense is asserted by a defendant, the burden to prove the elements of the defense rests on the person being charged. If the person is represented by a San Diego Criminal defense attorney, then the attorney must present the case with the relevant evidence. Evidence that the defense presents will also be in the form of witness testimony, pictures, and evidence gathered at the scene. Oftentimes, the strongest evidence for defense will be witness testimony in an assault case.

For a person to assert self defense they must have had 1)fear of imminent danger, 2)felt that the only way to prevent the danger was to use force, and 3)they must have used a reasonable amount of force.

The self defense examples is best described through the use of two scenarios:
Scenario A: Donna and Victoria find themselves at a restaurant and get into an argument. Without warning, Donna hits Victoria and Victoria, in an effort to protect herself, kicks Donna. Donna ends up falling to the floor and hitting her head.
Scenario B: Donna and Victoria find themselves at a restaurant and get into an argument. Out of nowhere, Donna hits Victoria. Victoria falls to the floor and grabs her purse and takes out a gun and shoots Donna.

Scenario A will be a good case in which Victoria can make an argument for self defense and Scenario B will likely not stand up in court as a defense for several reasons. In Scenario A, the hit from Donna came without warning, and Victoria had imminent danger that she would suffer harm if she did not do anything about it. So in order to prevent Donna from hitting her, she had to kick her to get her away from her. She used the reasonable amount of force necessary to assure Donna would not be able to harm her or that she would not suffer immediate injury.

Scenario B, on the other hand, had the same initial facts, but Victoria had already fallen to the floor. An argument can be made anything Victoria did from there would not have prevented the harm, unless Donna had the intention or showed that she would hit Victoria again. Furthermore, Victoria did not use a reasonable amount of force to prevent the injury. She could have walked away, or possibly pushed Donna away if she felt that there was harm. The use of a gun would not be reasonable.

The facts of each case are unique and need to evaluated by a Southern California Defense Lawyer that has handled thousands of assault cases. Consulting a professional will give you a better idea of what defenses you have available to you.

Self Defense is a defense that may be applicable in certain Los Angeles criminal cases. If a successful self defense assertion can be made, then it provides a complete defense and the case may be dismissed.

In order for self defense to be an appropriate defense, several elements must be met. First and foremost, you must believe that you are in imminent danger. The standard that is used, is that of the reasonable person. The Court will look to determine if a reasonable person in your situation would feel that they were in imminent danger.
For example, let's say that Dan sends Victor an email saying " I hate you, I am going to kill you". Victor then takes his gun, goes over to Dan and shoots him. Victor does not have a self defense argument. When Dan sent the email, he was not in the same room as Victor, and Victor had no reason to believe that his life was in imminent danger. The reasonable person in Victor's situation would not have believe there was any immediate harm to his well being and therefore, the first element of self defense would not be met.
The second element of self defense is that you believe imminent force is necessary to prevent the danger. Meaning, you have to act right away otherwise you will suffer harm.

Lets say that Dan and Victor are in a bar. Dan says that he is going to go down the street to buy some cigarettes, then when he comes back he is going to kill you. You wait until Dan returns, and then you hit him with a beer bottle. In this situation, force was not the only way you could have prevented the harm. You could have left the bar while Dan was gone. Let's say Dan swings at Victor with no warning and Victor reacts by swinging back. In this second example, force is necessary to prevent the harm, because Victor did not have any time to react. The second element of self defense would be met.

The final element of self defense requires that you defend yourself with a reasonable amount of force. This means that you must take into consideration how you are being attacked, and how you respond. If it is unreasonable, then you may not have a valid self defense argument. For example, Dan attacks Victor by socking him. Victor takes out his gun and shoots him. This is unreasonable force and Victor will likely be charged with murder. If Victor had hit back, he would have had a reasonable defense given that the other elements were met.

When you are involved in a Los Angeles assault case, or something similar, be sure to know your options as far as defenses. If an experienced Los Angeles Criminal Defense attorney can assert a valid self defense on your behalf, your case may be dismissed.

When a person is charged with a criminal case in southern California, the burden is on prosecution to prove that the person is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Looking at an example will provide clarification. Dan was stopped by officers on suspicion of driving under the influence. He was sleeping in the backseat of his parked car, in a parking lot, with the engine off and the key in his pocket. The parking lot was to a Target store, and no bar, club or restaurant. Dan submitted to a breath test and blew a .10, well above the legal limit for blood alcohol.

When brought before the Judge, prosecution will argue that Dan was in fact driving under the influence, even if he was found sleeping in the backseat of his parked car. They will use the facts of the situation ( known as circumstantial evidence) to create a scenario for the court that demonstrates that at some point, Dan was driving while under the influence.

They will say that he had to have gotten to the parking lot somehow since it was apparent that Dan had not drank somewhere nearby and walked to his car. They will suggest that the car is Dan's, he is the only person in it, and he has the keys. Therefore, all the facts lead up to Dan having driven to the parking lot, while intoxicated and eventually having stopped and taken a nap.

The jury will then determine if the facts prove that Dan is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

However, Dan has the option to present his defense. With the help of a knowledgeable DUI lawyer, Dan can prepare a strong argument that disputes one of the essential elements of a DUI case. If Dan presents a defense, he has the burden to show that the defense invalidates his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

A necessary element for a person to be found guilty of a DUI, is that the prosecutor's must prove the person had been driving AND intoxicated. Here, there is no dispute that Dan was intoxicated, since there is a breathalyzer proving his BAC. However, he was not observed by officer's to be driving. The prosecutor's can only make an inference, and using evidence, prove that inference is true beyond a reasonable doubt.

Dan, with the help of a DUI specialist, argues that he had not been driving but was dropped off at his car by a friend after leaving the friend's house and realizing that he was too drunk to drive, fell asleep in the backseat. His Criminal Defense lawyer then creates a scenario for the Judge that corroborates Dan's account of events that night. The car was still parked, and Dan was in the backseat sleeping. The keys were not in the ignition or anywhere near the ignition, but were in his pocket. Additionally, the attorney will likely contact the friend to testify as to Dan's story, creating a strong defense that Dan was not driving.

A strong defense to any criminal charge significantly weakens Prosecution's argument. With a weak argument, the government cannot prove guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and the case will likely be dismissed or reduced.

California Penal Code §503 makes it unlawful for a person to fraudulently appropriate property of another person's that has been entrusted to you. This charge is often also referred to as employee theft of fraud. To put it more simply, it is when a person uses their position of trust to steal from those who have entrusted them.

Embezzlement can be extended to money, or personal property, as long as it has been misappropriated by a person who is being trusted with it.

An example of an embezzlement case would be a typical bank teller scenario. A bank tells is entrusted by others to handle their money and protect it. If the bank teller is stealing money and directing it into their own account, they will be charged with embezzlement. Embezzlement is a more serious form of theft because it is being abused by someone who is trusted with the person's property.

In order for a person to be found guilty of embezzlement they must be in a position of trust. For example, let's say John and Dan are friends. Dan takes a $100 bill from John's wallet when he is not looking. This is not embezzlement, John had not given Dan the $100 to watch for him, nor was Dan in a position of trust to watch that $100 for him. In comparison, let's say that Danielle works as a babysitter. When she goes to babysit for the Smiths, she takes a couple hundred dollar bills out of the Smith's drawer. This case will meet the requirements for being charged with embezzlement because Danielle was in a position where the Smiths trusted her with their home and property.

Although it occurs in a variety of settings, embezzlement is most often found in the employment arena. If tried and found guilty of embezzlement, the charge will remain on a person's permanent record until it can be properly expunged. Any future employment that you seek will ask for about the embezzlement charge, adding to the consequences of an embezzlement charge in addition to the imposed sentence.

An embezzlement charge on your record will affect future employment, applications to financial institutions, as well as education applications. A San Diego Criminal Defense lawyer has handled thousands of embezzlement cases and can discuss with you the available defenses and options. It is important to prepare a strong defense for your embezzlement case to assure that you have a fighting chance of having it reduced or dismissed.

A commonly used defense in California drug sales, illegal gambling and prostitution cases is entrapment. Entrapment is a defense that the person engaged in unlawful conduct due to the coercion or pressure from a law enforcement officer. To be a successful defense, the person must not be predisposed to committing the illegal act being charged and there must be actual harassment, fraud or pressure directed by law enforcement towards the person charged.

Entrapment is a frequently used in situations where an undercover officer asks to buy drugs or solicit from a person who obliges and are subsequently charged with the sale of drugs or prostitution. If the entrapment defense is successful, then any evidence obtained is excluded from trial. This is what is referred to as the exclusionary rule.

For example, let's discuss a situation where Person A is a law abiding citizen. He is a family man, is a high paying vice president of a large corporation job and has never been arrested or charged with any criminal offense besides several unpaid parking tickets. Person A is approached by an officer and asked to sell him some heroin. Person A refuses and explains that he is not the person to talk to, and he wouldn't know where to obtain any illegal controlled substances. The officer insists, and begins to call and appear at places Person A is with his family. After repeatedly asking for a week, the officer calls up Person A and tells him that he will have Person A sent to jail for unpaid parking tickets and will personally assure that he serves jail time if he doesn't comply with the officer's demands. Person A, afraid of jeopardizing his job agrees and obtains the heroin. The officer immediately reports Person A and has him charged for felony drug possession. As evidence the officer presents pictures and recorded conversations of Person A obtaining the heroin from a known drug dealer and transferring it over to the officer.

In the above mentioned example, Person A should be able to provide a strong defense for entrapment, as there was clear coercion, pressure and threats from the officer. If it is successful, any evidence that was obtained through unlawful entrapment will be dismissed. In this case, the photographs and recorded conversations will not be used to prepare a case against Person A. Without that evidence, there is no case against Person A because the government cannot sufficiently prove that the person committed the crime. The case will consequently, be dismissed.

If a case has a strong entrapment defense, consult an experienced Los Angeles Criminal Defense lawyer to give your case the best possible chance of being dismissed. A knowledgeable lawyer will review the specific facts of your case and be able to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of an entrapment defense. If an entrapment defense is not the right one for you, then there may be other available options that will help your case be reduced or dismissed!

When a Southern California Criminal Defense lawyer quotes you a fee for the completion of your case, several different factors will be taken into consideration. It is important to understand what the basis for the fee is in order to know whether you are overpaying, or if you are paying an adequate amount for an attorney that has the experience and knowledge that you need.

One of the biggest factors that will be considered when quoting an attorney's fees is the complexity of the case. If the case is a very simple straightforward case the fee will be much lower. For example, if a DUI case has an accident, and a blood alcohol level of .12 with another injured party involved, it is going to be a complex case. There are several factor that make it a felony, including injury and an accident as well as a high BAC. In contrast, take a DUI case where the driver was pulled over on the side of the road asleep in the backseat with a BAC of .07. The latter case is much simpler and could probably be resolved in one or two court appearances.

Whether the case is a felony or misdemeanor will make a difference when quoting a fee. Felony cases are generally more extensive, require more defense work and court appearances and consequently will warrant a higher fee. Also, the lawyer will work hard at preparing a defense that will give your case the best chance of being reduced. Misdemeanor cases generally do not require jail or prison time and can be resolved in fewer appearances requiring less time from the attorney.

If there is a prior criminal record, the Judge will be inclined to grant a harsher sentence, especially if the crime currently being charged is of the same nature. An experienced criminal defense lawyer will prepare testimonials and documents from friends and family to demonstrate the strong moral character of the client to help reduce any predisposition the Judge may have. Furthermore, the lawyer will look into rehabilitation or education programs in which the client may enroll if it is applicable to the case. This helps present the client as more than just another case number, but a person with a name. Countering a prior criminal record will require additional work on behalf of the attorney and therefore a fee quote will be higher than someone who has no prior criminal history to explain.

The attorney's reputation and years of experience will also influence the fees they charge. If an attorney has been practicing in the same community for a lengthy period of time, they have built up a strong reputation among Judges, courts and Prosecutor's and with that experience can successfully argue your case and protect your rights. Attorneys who are more established tend to charge higher fees, and it is that invaluable experience and knowledge that you are paying for.

Consider all the factors before retaining a San Diego Criminal Defense attorney to help you with your case. The most important thing is making sure that you get the least possible charge, or the case completely dismissed so that your criminal records is minimal.

One of the biggest concerns when hiring a Southern California Criminal Defense attorney is the amount it will cost you. Many people are on a budget and the expense of an attorney is not something that has been planned for, making it difficult to be able to hire an experienced and knowledgeable attorney with the budget they have. Fortunately, there are many options so that a person who needs the help of a well established attorney is able to get it.

Many personal injury cases or civil litigation type cases will allow what is known as a contingency fee. This allows the person being represented to not have to provide any money initially, or as a retainer. The attorney gets paid from any money that is awarded or part of a settlement. The general percentage given as a contingency fee is generally around 33%.

Criminal cases, however, do not use contingency fees. It is against the California Rules of Ethics for attorneys to charge a contingency rate on a criminal case. Additionally, there is rarely any money that is being sought in criminal court, therefore such a fee method would not make sense. Beware of a criminal defense attorney who agrees to do your case on a contingency basis, they may be violating ethical obligations they have to the California State Bar.

Criminal Defense lawyers generally work with a flat attorney's fees. They will quote you a flat fee that will include all work on your case as well as a set number of courtroom appearances. If your case goes to trial or becomes more complicated involving several more courtroom appearances, the attorney will let you know beforehand how much each additional appearance will cost. In most cases, only 2 to 3 appearance are required and your case is resolved and that will be included in your flat fee.

They flat fee may be high based on the specific facts and complexities of your case. In those situations experienced attorneys offer a payment plan that allows you to make payments and still get the help you need for your case. The payment plans allows a reasonable solution for those who want to hire professional and reputable legal help but feel that they cannot afford to pay the entire retainer up front.

When looking to hire a criminal defense attorney, it is also important to consider the old adage, that what you pay for is what you get. When you pay a little more for legal help, you are paying the expertise and knowledge of years of experience. The attorneys who have been practicing in the criminal law field for 30 plus years may have higher prices than those who have not, but they have handled cases like yours thousands of times. They are familiar with the courtroom, the Judge and the Prosecutor's and are able to offer you a strong effective defense in comparison to those that are new to the field and charge less for the same case.

Having a criminal record may affect your future career and educational endeavors. Be sure to give yourself the best possible chance in having your case dismissed or reduced!

Entrapment is a defense that may be used in some California Criminal cases. Entrapment is a valid defense when police officers engage in conduct that would cause otherwise law abiding citizens to commit a criminal act or unlawful conduct. Although the concept seems fairly straightforward, it is a very complex defense that must be used properly for it to be effective.

In order for someone to successfully use the entrapment defense a significant distinction must be made between opportunity and pressure, fraud or inducement. If someone is given a mere opportunity by a police officer to commit an unlawful act, it will not be enough to constitute entrapment.

The officer must have pressured you for entrapment to apply. This means applying a significant amount of pressure, not just a minimal amount. They may have offered you a high payment or bothered you until you felt that you had no choice in the matter and felt that you must complete the task they are asking of you. For example, let's assume an officer is dressed undercover and asks you to sell him some drugs, asking you to engage in the illegal act of California Drug Sales. You politely decline and the officer continues walking along. There is no pressure in this situation, the officer merely asked once and when he was turned down, he left. This is more of an opportunity. The officer offered an opportunity for you to sell drugs illegally, but since nothing came of it both parties went their separate ways.

In comparison, in another situation the officer asks to buy some drugs from you and you decline. As you start to walk away, the officer follows you begging for you to sell him some drugs. Still you refuse but the officer continues to ask you and even tells you that he needs it and will pay you triple the price. This is pressure and not opportunity. The officer is applying steady pressure and trying to persuade you and giving you a high incentive to engage in the illegal act.

The officer may also use harassment to induce a person to commit an unlawful act. Harassment includes threats or unwavering solicitation. Let's say that an officer calls you and asks you to sell him cocaine, engaging in drug sales and you say no. He then calls you everyday, even shows up at your house asking you to sell him cocaine enough though you have told him you cannot do that. Then he says if you do not sell him cocaine then he will make sure you get fired from your job and remain unemployed. This is pressure and an entrapment defense would be valid in court.

In cases where fraud is used to persuade someone to commit an unlawful act, entrapment will be a successful defense in court. If an officer has explained to you that a certain act is not illegal and you will not be prosecuted, when in fact that is not true, you will have a defense to having committed that act. If the officer explains to you that if you allow him to take drugs from your drawer and leave money without you knowing that it is not a illegal act, there may be entrapment by fraud.

The entrapment defense is very detailed, and will depend on the specific facts of each case. An experienced Los Angeles Criminal Defense attorney can explain to you when you have a strong entrapment defense for your case after reviewing the background and facts of your case.

Entrapment is a complete defense in some criminal cases. A person will be said to have been entrapped if a law enforcement officer engaged in conduct that would cause a normally law abiding citizen to commit a crime. The definition of entrapment may seem fairly straightforward, but in actuality it is a lot more complex in it's application.

Entrapment will be a successful defense when there is pressure, harassment or fraud applied by the law enforcement officer. Anything less than that will not be considered entrapment. The definition of what constitutes enough pressure or harassment is subjective, and therefore is open to many different interpretations. An experienced Los Angeles Criminal Defense attorney has handled many entrapment defenses and can determine whether a specific case has a strong or weak entrapment defense.

One of the biggest elements that will distinguish a valid entrapment defense from what is not entrapment is the element of predisposition. If a person is predisposed, has the inclination to engage in certain kinds of behavior, there is a weak argument in favor of entrapment. The Supreme Court ruling in Mathew v. United States (485 U.S. 58 (1988)) determined that entrapment will only be successful in cases where there is a lack of predisposition on behalf of the person being charged. If the government can establish that the person trying the entrapment defense was predisposed to commit the unlawful act then he or she will not be able to use the defense successfully. It won't be entrapment when the person is already willing to commit a crime and the law enforcement officer merely provides the opportunity to do so.

For example, let's assume there is a man who is a known drug dealer. In order to gather evidence, officers plan a stakeout and observe him selling drugs to other people. Then to gather further evidence they go undercover and approach the man to buy drugs from him. After refusing once, he immediately sells the drugs and is arrested. If he were to claim an entrapment defense , it would not be a strong defense because he had a predisposition to sell the drugs regardless of who it was to and without any pressure of coercion for law enforcement. The officer provided him with an opportunity to engage in criminal conduct; selling him the drugs.

Predisposition is often proven through prior conduct and reputation. If a person has been arrested and charged with sales of narcotics before, pleading entrapment on a third offense will not be a strong argument due to the previous convictions. In comparison, if a person has nothing on his criminal record and has not been known to engage in any kind of unlawful behavior in relations to drugs they may be able to present a strong case for entrapment. There is a strong case for person B, because it is harder to prove that the person has a predisposition to commit the kind of behavior they are being charged with.

Determining predisposition requires effective argument and a persuasive argument in favor of the defense. A knowledgeable Southern California Criminal Defense lawyer can prepare the most effective strategy when entrapment is in issue. There is a fine distinction between what the government will consider entrapment, and when they will find it to be inapplicable. Speak to a Criminal Defense attorney to understand your options and explore the defenses that are best for your case.

When a person is charged with Prostitution, a commonly used defense is entrapment. An entrapment defense will be successful when it can be proven that law enforcement engaged in behavior that would cause an otherwise law abiding citizen to engage in an unlawful act. If it is shown that a law enforcement officer pressured or persuaded a person to engage in prostitution, there is a strong defense in favor of the person charged and will lead to a dismissal of the case.

The legislation defines prostitution as a lewd act between persons for money or other consideration. California Penal Code § 647 (b) punishes those that solicit, agree to participate, or participate in prostitution. Therefore, if a person is pressured or coerced by a law enforcement officer to engage in prostitution they will have a valid entrapment defense. However, if there is no fraud or pressure and it can be proven that they have a predisposition to engage in prostitution the entrapment defense will not be valid. The prosecutor will demonstrate that a person has the predisposition to commit a crime through the use of any existing criminal record and proof of character. Predisposition to commit an unlawful act will strongly weaken an entrapment defense.

For example, let's say that Person A has nothing on their criminal record besides a lot of parking tickets on their record and cannot afford to pay them. Additionally, she is not known by friends and family to be of a promiscuous nature. An officer contacts Person A and asks her if she would like for him to make the tickets disappear, and all she has to do is come over to his home and engage in some activities with him. Person A says no. The officer continues to call her asking for the same, and eventually tells her that he will make sure that due to the huge amount of unpaid tickets, he will make sure that she not only owes steep fines, but will serve jail time as well. Person A, terrified at the idea and scared agrees and engages in unlawful conduct that results in a charge of prostitution.

In this situation, Person A has a strong defense with entrapment. Prosecutors may try to show that she has a predisposition to engage in solicitation or prostitution, but their argument would be very week based on the facts. She has no prior criminal
background, and a good reputation among friends and her community. Furthermore, she declined the officer's offer, but he continued to pressure her offering her a deal she needed, even threatening her with high penalties and jail time until she felt she had no choice but to concede.

Based on the facts, an entrapment defense will likely be successful, resulting in a dismissal of her case. To determine whether the facts of your prostitution case will yield a successful entrapment defense, speak to an experienced Los Angeles Criminal Defense attorney. They can provide you with an analysis of your case and discuss all the available options that you may have.

Entrapment is a full defense that is common to certain types of criminal cases. Among these are drug sales cases, prostitution and charges of lewd conduct. Depending on the specific facts of the case, as well as the individual's background, the defense may be successful and will result in a dismissal.

One of the types of charges where Entrapment is argued often is in drug sales. The typical case will involve an undercover officer who asks to buy drugs from a known dealer. The dealer sells drugs to the officer and is arrested and charged with a violation of the California Health and Safety Code § 11352. §11352 makes it unlawful for any person to be transporting or selling a controlled substance.

The defense will only be successful if the person was coerced or pressured into selling the controlled substance to the officer. It must be more than a suggestion, it must be enough to make reasonable person feel that they cannot refuse but do as the officer asks. If the person is predisposed to selling drugs then the entrapment defense will not work. The prosecutor will demonstrate that a person has the predisposition to commit a crime through the use of any existing criminal record and proof of character.

For example, Person A has been convicted of selling a controlled substance 7 years ago. He is known as a seller and officers have been observing him for two weeks. Eventually an officer goes undercover, approaches A and asks to buy some of what he is selling. Person A initially refuses and the officer starts to walk away. As the officer walks away, A calls him back and exchanges the substance for cash. Person A is arrested and charged.

In the above mentioned situation, an entrapment defense may be weak based on the facts. The person has been previously convicted of selling a controlled substance, which implies that they have the predisposition to engage in the illegal act of selling drugs since they have been convicted of the act before. Any evidence of predisposition will often weaken the person's argument for entrapment.

Additionally, in the example there is no pressure or force coming from the officer. The officer walks away after he is told no, but person A asks the officer to come back. If Person A tries to make a case for entrapment, it might be dismissed because there is no evidence of pressure or force, and it seems as if they are predisposed to sell controlled substances.

In cases involving charges of California Drug Sales, an experienced Los Angeles Criminal Defense attorney will always consider the defense of entrapment. In many cases it is a strong and effective defense. Whether it will apply in a case will depend on the specific facts of the case and the background of the person. Consult an attorney for a full analysis of your case to determine which defense is the best argument.