Charlotte DWI Lawyer Brad Smith answers: A past conviction is keeping me from finding work what can I do?
A state legislator has introduced a bill that she says will close a loophole in Illinois’ sex offender registry. Critics of the bill say the bill is “overly punitive and burdensome” on offenders who have paid their debt to society, according to the Chicago Tribune.
Charlotte DWI Lawyer Brad Smith answers the question: What are the long term effects of being convicted of a crime?
The political battle over voting rights in North Carolina has focused in recent years on the issue of photo identification. One side of the political battle wants to require voters to produce valid, photo identification at polling places, while the other side contends that this requirement infringes upon the voting rights of citizens.
J. Bradley Smith of Arnold & Smith, PLLC answers the question “Can I be arrested without evidence against me?”
In general, a person’s privacy rights extend as is “reasonable.” Persons do not, for instance, have a reasonable expectation of privacy when they walk on a public street. They may be photographed and recorded in a variety of settings and formats, and their words and behavior can be freely observed, noted and memorialized.
J. Bradley Smith of Arnold & Smith, PLLC answers the question “Can I be arrested without evidence against me?”
In a meeting last month, the Santa Clara County, California supervisors voted 4 to 1 to authorize the expenditure of $500,000 on a product they had never seen. They did not know how the product worked, nor were they even sure of its brand name. The supervisors were required to enter into a nondisclosure agreement to even purchase and use the device.
But they would not be using the rectangular device—“small enough to fit into a suitcase, that intercepts a cellphone signal by acting like a cellphone tower,” according to the New York Times. The Santa Clara County Sheriff—Laurie Smith—would be using the device to track down terrorists and missing persons, she said. She could offer no details on technical specifications to the Times and said she had not seen a product demonstration.
Cell-site stimulators—called various names including StingRay or KingFish—capture texts, emails and other data “from all wireless devices in the immediate area” of a device. According to a 2011 Federal Bureau of Investigators affidavit, the device captures data from all devices in an area—even those of bystanders not targeted for investigation. That information is purged, the F.B.I. said, in order to ensure privacy rights, according to the Times.
For now, law-enforcement agencies and their technology suppliers have insisted on a veil of secrecy about the devices, saying disclosure “would let criminals, including terrorists, ‘thwart the use of this technology,’” according to the Times.
J. Bradley Smith of Arnold & Smith, PLLC responds to “The person that called the police doesn’t want to press charges, can I still be prosecuted?”
The political world has been aflutter with outrage at Hillary Rodham Clinton’s use of a personal email account while employed as the Secretary of the United States Government’s Department of State.
In a press conference last week, Clinton said she decided which emails were a part of the public record and which emails were private. The latter, she suggested, had been deleted.
Now an American state—Massachusetts—is giving police officers the same power, only not over email. According to the Boston Globe, the Massachusetts Secretary of State has refused the newspaper’s request for “the names of five police officers caught drunken driving,” for a “report on an officer who was arrested,” for “booking photos of a state trooper,” and for an “entire log of people incarcerated in the state prison system.”
It seems—both at the state and federal levels—secrecy is all the rage.
In Massachusetts, that state’s supervisor of public records told the Globe that public departments have “the discretion to withhold records determined to be covered by CORI.” CORI stands for “Criminal Offender Record Information. The Massachusetts Secretary of State contends that law-enforcement officials have sweeping powers to decide what criminal records are made public, according to the Globe.
J. Bradley Smith of Arnold & Smith, PLLC answers the question “Do I need to hire an attorney if I have been falsely accused?”
If you are a parent and your child is a teenager, you need a criminal defense lawyer.
So writes author Lisa Green in her new book On Your Case: A compassionate (and Only Slightly Bossy) Legal Guide for Every Stage of a Woman’s Life. Green cites numerous examples in her book showing how even good intentions and seemingly harmless actions can balloon into criminal charges for unsuspecting teens—and parents.
Green writes that parents of teenagers need a criminal defense attorney on speed dial for more than criminal charges. What if, for instance, a school administrator asks a teenager to hand over his or her cell phone because he or she was accused of sending inappropriate text messages? The child or young adult has not been charged with a crime, but citizens—including children and young adults—have Constitutional rights, and those rights extend to investigations.
School administrators can search a cell phone, a laptop, a book bag or any other item belonging to a student only if they have reasonable suspicion that a child has engaged in criminal activity. If a search request is made, Green writes, a child or young adult should refuse the request and ask to call one’s parents.
J. Bradley Smith of Arnold & Smith, PLLC answers the question “Can I be arrested without evidence against me?”
Remember Enron?
It seemed like such a big deal until all the malfeasance that (allegedly) caused 2009’s Great Recession came to light, causing the collapse and usurpation of thousands of businesses large and small, nationwide.
Enron was an energy company. It collapsed. People were mad and, true to form, politicians seized on the madness, blamed their opponents for causing it, and proposed a solution politicians are often (or always) apt to propose: a new law.
Out came Sarbanes-Oxley, an Act designed to combat the kind of white-collar financial fraud that led to Enron’s demise. Like many laws, the Act was written broadly, was “too broad and undifferentiated,” according to United States Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, “with too-high maximum penalties, which give prosecutors too much leverage and sentences too much discretion.”
J. Bradley Smith of Arnold & Smith, PLLC answers the question “Should I ever plead guilty to a charge?”
The criminal law, it is said, evolves as technology does, and criminal codes and doctrines grow to fit the new circumstances and technologies that criminals, would-be criminals and unknowing criminals commit. It should come as no surprise, then, that longstanding criminal doctrines are being applied to actions taken on devices that have become ubiquitous in modern American life: phones.
Except, devices that people carry around these days have come a long way from the banana-sized box lawyer Johnny Cochran made famous carrying around in the early-to-mid 1990s. It is said that the law cannot keep pace with society, evolving about twenty years slower than the culture, but even the United States Supreme Court has caught on to the uniqueness of the modern “cell phone,” calling the devices “minicomputers that also happen to have the capacity to be used as a telephone” in a landmark case last year called Riley v. California.
In that case, the high court unanimously rejected the United States government’s position that when a person is arrested, a law-enforcement officer is entitled to seize everything off the arrestee’s phone. The court ruled officers need a warrant to do that.
Phones—or whatever one calls them nowadays—are still bringing individuals into criminal jeopardy, however, as a recent case from Massachusetts illustrates.
Charlotte DWI and Criminal Defense Attorney J. Bradley Smith of Arnold & Smith, PLLC answers the question “What am I obligated to do if I’ve been pulled for Drinking and Driving?”
The United States Supreme Court is comprised of nine judges whose legal educations began at either Harvard or Yale. With the exception of Ruth Bader Ginsburg—who transferred to Columbia University School of Law—all nine obtained their law degrees from Harvard or Yale.
The (alleged) hoity-toity backgrounds of the justices—underscored in a January 22, 2015 Washington Post piece—came into laser focus in oral arguments in Rodriguez v. United States, according to Bloomberg News.
The issue in Rodriguez was whether police can use a dog to sniff for drugs around a vehicle during a routine traffic stop. Harvard Law Professor Noah Feldman, who observed the arguments, suggested the “browbeating… conservatives” and “assist[ing]… liberals” on the court, through their questioning of lawyers for Rodriguez and the United States, revealed their ideological divides.
Those divides—and who the justices are—both Bloomberg and the Post suggested, are important issues that sometimes define and nearly always, at least, inform their decisions.
With respect to traffic stops, at least a few of the justices—unlike many high-profile political leaders who use professional drivers and have not driven a car in decades—actually have experience with roadway traffic. In 2011, Justice Antonin Scalia was cited after rear-ending a vehicle on George Washington Memorial Parkway. Justice Stephen Breyer was hit by a car while biking in 1993, proving he has at least had contact with an automobile.
Charlotte DWI Lawyer Brad Smith answers the question: What are the long term effects of being convicted of a crime?
American Sniper Chris Kyle and friend Chad Littlefield were in an environment both men knew well when “troubled drug user” Eddie Ray Routh shot them dead. All three men were military veterans—Kyle a Navy SEAL and famed Iraq-war sniper and Routh a former marine corporal. Littlefield was Kyle’s neighbor and had teamed with him to help veterans returning from tours of duty.
On Feb. 2, 2013, Littlefield and Kyle had taken Routh to “the expansive Rough Creek Lodge and Resort” south of Fort Worth, Texas, to help him with mental issues stemming from his tours of duty in Iraq and Haiti, according to CNN and ABC News.
Late that day, a hunting guide found Kyle’s and Littlefield’s bodies; an all-points-bulletin was issued for Routh, who fled in Kyle’s pickup truck to his sister’s house 65-miles away from the shooting range. Routh’s sister described Routh as being in a state of psychosis; alarmed, she phoned the authorities.
Law-enforcement officers eventually caught Routh and arrested him. Police video from before Routh’s arrest show Routh telling officers that “Anarchy has been killing the world. I don’t know if I’m going insane. Is this about hell walking on earth right now?”
Charlotte Criminal Lawyer Blog
