Criminal Law Review

The United States Constitution provides protection for people accused of committing crimes. One of these protections is the right to be represented by an attorney. If you are in Nevada, you will want the services of a Las Vegas criminal defense attorney. A Las Vegas Criminal Defense Lawyer is well-trained in the law and will work hard to see that your constitutional rights are defended.

The first right provided to all citizens is the presumption of innocence. That is, the court assumes that you are innocent unless the prosecutor can prove otherwise. This presumption is not actually in the Constitution, but it is implied through the 5th, 6th and 14th amendments. This is the reason that, when you are brought into court, you plead not guilty. It is then up to the prosecutor to prove your guilt.

Another right says that you can’t be held in jail for an undetermined length of time. Speedy trials are a right all Americans are born with. You have the right to petition to either have your plea tried or to be released from detention. This petition is called a writ of habeas corpus. This right is considered to be one of the most efficient safeguards to your liberty. Under this right, they can’t “lock you up and throw away the key” before you have been tried.

You’ve seen it on television and in the movies a hundred or more times. The police officer stops the suspect and “reads him his rights.” It starts out, “You have the right to remain silent” and informs the suspect that he has the right to have legal representation. This right has to do with the Fifth Amendment, one of the amendments in the Bill of Rights. The Fifth Amendment prevents the suspect from having to do or say anything that would incriminate him. Under ancient societies, an accused person would be tortured into giving a confession. Under this torture, the suspect would probably end up confessing even if he were innocent. The Fifth Amendment prevents this situation from happening because it says you don’t have to say a word. It’s up to the prosecutor to prove your guilt.

Another right guaranteed by the Constitution is the right to have your case heard and decided by a jury of your peers. Having a jury trial assures you of being heard openly and fairly. Again, this right means that the court can’t keep you in a secret place and come up with an arbitrary decision. All arguments must be made in the open. Normally, the jury’s decision must be unanimous.

The Constitution prevents certain laws from being passed. No law that is passed can be applied retroactively. This means that, if you carried out a certain action today, the government couldn’t prosecute you if they passed a law against that activity next year. The prohibition against passing ex post facto laws is spelled out in Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution.

The law is complex. You don’t have enough knowledge to survive alone in court. To ensure that your rights are upheld, you need a competent lawyer.

There is a trend among police departments across the U.S. to force DUI suspects to have their blood alcohol content (BAC) measured. Since BAC evidence is generally the most powerful evidence to support a DUI conviction, many jurisdictions are going the extra mile to get it.

During “No Refusal” campaigns, drivers who are suspected of DUI are given an ultimatum. They may submit to a breath test to measure their blood alcohol content, or they will be forced to give a blood sample for testing. After a motorist is given the choice and still refuses to take a breath test, a warrant to obtain a blood sample is immediately obtained. Judges are on standby to sign the blood draw warrants.

In some jurisdictions that allow forced blood draws on DUI suspects, the officers do the blood draws themselves, rather than taking suspects to the hospital for blood draws by trained medical professionals. Although there has been at least one lawsuit filed because of this practice, it has become more common to allow officers without adequate medical training to draw blood from DUI suspects.

Scripps News reported an Arizona man filed a lawsuit after allegedly developing a persistent infection at the site of a blood draw performed by a Pima County sheriff’s deputy. Under Arizona DUI laws, suspects must submit to blood alcohol content testing or lose their driver’s license for one year. The officer makes the choice whether to take a breath or blood sample and the driver has no choice.

As DUI lawyers can more easily challenge breath test results, law enforcement departments have become more aggressive with no refusal events and policies. Blood alcohol testing done with a blood sample is far more reliable and not as easily refuted in court.

However, when the arresting officers take forced blood samples at the roadside, there is a greater risk to the health of DUI suspects. As no refusal policies become more common, more personal injury lawsuits are likely. Regardless of the disposition of a DUI case, if a suspect is injured or becomes ill due to a forced blood draw; taxpayers may wind up footing the bill for medical expenses and punitive damages.

One of the most common incidental results of many crimes and family situations is the issuance of an Order of Protection. There are two types. The first is called a “refrain from” Order because it does not prohibit any behavior that is not already illegal. Consequently, it serves to add a charge of contempt to whatever new charge is made against a defendant.

The more serious type of an Order of Protection is what is known as a “stay away” Order. This requires the defendant to completely stay away from the alleged victim’s home, place of employment, school, business or otherwise anywhere whatsoever in public. In addition, any and all firearms must be turned in to the local police department. This type of Order of Protection is used more often to punish a defendant than to protect a victim.

Where there are custody and visitation issues, one parent will embellish, make false accusations, or report harmless behavior to police to have the other parent arrested. The logic is that the defendant perpetrator is violent or unstable to obtain custody or be entitled to visitation. This does have an impact with the court tribunal hearing the matter, and certainly in criminal court, the defendant is no better off with a pending divorce or custody matter in another court.

In the family context, these are unfortunately used more as a tool against a spouse or the parent of a child in common. Where there is a divorce pending, it is most common that one party to make allegations of harassment or aggravated harassment. This is done in order to obtain a favorable position regarding child custody and visitation. Since one’s children are often their most guarded pleasure, people often embellish or falsify offending behavior.

On long island, there are mandatory arrest and usually overnight visits to a jail cell for any allegation involving a family matter. While it is clear that the children are most often hurt by their parents each other arrested, the relationship between the parties once the issue is resolved is forever destroyed. Time easily heals wounds from a bad relationship, but being put in jail and charged with a crime is much more difficult.

It is not uncommon for people to be charged with misdemeanors and felony contempt charges as the result of a harassment violation, such as a phone call. A violation of an Order of Protection is an additional charge, and will become a felony violation if there was physical contact of any kind, including simply walking past the person. The most common type of violation is an allegation of harassment, which can be either a violation or misdemeanor.

A violation of harassment is defined as when one person with intent to harass, annoy or alarm another and engaging in any unwanted physical conduct, following a person in public or, “engage in a course of conduct or repeatedly commits acts which alarm or seriously annoy such other person and which serve no legitimate purpose.” This last provision is used as a catch all and many a defendant is left to wonder what type of conduct would not violate another’s rights under the statute.

Misdemeanor harassment is when with intent to harass, annoy or alarm another and engages in any physical conduct on the basis or race, color or religion of another, makes a telephone call with no legitimate purpose, or communicates by electronic means. By far the most common is leaving a message on an answering machine or sending a text or email message as they are considered by electronic means.

The lesson to be learned is that the use of electronics raises the level of harassment from a violation to a misdemeanor. While it may be less intrusive to the alleged victim, it is legally more serious. One would be wise not to leave messages or otherwise create a digital communication, which also has the benefit of leaving an evidentiary trail.

Overall, the use of an Order of Protection has served only to add a tool to the arsenal one has at their disposal when fighting their legal battles. A single piece of paper is not going to stand in the way of someone that truly desires to harm another. It will tend to show that at least the court and the district attorneys office tried to do something, even if it is at the expense of hundreds if not thousands of falsely arrested people.