In 2012, I will have practiced law as a trial attorney for 25 years.   A quarter of a century!  I cannot believe how quickly the time has passed.  During that time I have handled many hundreds of cases for individuals and enterprises.   During the first half of my career, I mostly represented creative individuals and entrepreneurs in business disputes concerning their intellectual and real property rights.  During the last several years, I have developed a blended practice of mostly criminal and some civil cases.  Every year I take to trial many cases, both civil and criminal.

To me, it really does not matter whether my client is involved in a civil or a criminal case.  The stakes are always high, and my commitment to passionately advocating for my client is the same.   In every case I accept, I look for the thread of humanity that runs through it.   It does not matter whether I am dealing with a white collar case where my client is accused of stealing millions of dollars, or a criminal case where my client is accused of murder.   In either scenario, I am always listening for the human dynamics that underlie what really happened here – the universal human themes that run through every case, whether it is filed by the government against an individual as a criminal case, or between individuals in a civil dispute.

At the heart of every case are the people and their story. From the first call from the client, to the closing argument in court, my primary focus is what really happened, because every case, whether civil or criminal, involves a human drama where the client is the star, and my job is to first understand and then tell their story in the most compelling, compassionate way.   The law and rules of evidence and procedure are a means to this end, the tools in my tool box.   My clients know that when they hire me, I will tirelessly work to prepare their case and collaborate with them so that they get their constitutionally-guaranteed day in court.

I believe that fundamentally we are the same, and that every court case involves the culmination of a larger drama written in the language of universal human experience. I like to spend a lot of time preparing with my clients so that I can learn as much as I can about what happened and the people involved in their case.  I immerse myself in their reality.  If I can truly understand what happened on an intellectual and an emotional level, then I can convey that to the jurors in a way that will resonate with them.  This is my gift to my clients, and my purpose in doing this work.

By now you have probably heard about AB 109, otherwise known as “Realignment.”  Realignment was signed into law by the governor and effectively transfers responsibility for non-serious, nonviolent and non-Pen C §290 registerable sex offenders from the state to the counties. Realignment applies to anyone who is sentenced on or after October 1, 2011.

Here are some examples of what realignment means:

Sentences for most felonies that are nonserious, nonviolent and nonregisterable sex offenses (so-called “non-non-non felonies”), if the defendant also has no prior serious, violent or registerable convictions, will now be served in the county jail.  See Pen C §1170(h)(2)-(3).

Felonies with non-specified terms in the underlying statute will be punishable by a term of 16 months, 2 years or 3 years in the county jail.  Pen C §§18; 1170(h)(1). Sentences for these offenses may include a period of county jail and a period of probation not to exceed the maximum possible term.  Pen C §1170(h)(5).

Counties may permit electronic monitoring in lieu of bail (Pen C §1203.018) or home detention in lieu of jail (Pen C §1203.016). Time on electronic monitoring or home detention counts toward mandatory minimum sentences. Pen C §2900.5.

Individuals convicted of a current or prior serious or violent offense,  who are required to register under Pen C §290 or whose sentence is enhanced under Pen C §186.11 (taking more than $100,000 under certain circumstances), must serve their current term in prison.  Pen C §1170(h)(3).

Individuals convicted of felonies punishable by a prescribed term of county jail in the underlying statute will not be supervised after release; there will be no period of parole.

Prison sentences for non-non-non felonies will be followed by a period of up to 3 years of Postrelease Community Supervision administered by the counties. Violations of Post Release Community Supervision can be punished in many ways, including flash incarceration.  Revocations must be done by a new Court Revocation Officer.   Pen C §§3450-3458.

Beginning July 1, 2013, the parole revocation process will become a county court-based process. Until then, parole revocations will continue under the Board of Parole Hearings.

The new criminal sentencing provisions and most of the post-release and parole provisions are operative on and after October 1, 2011.

ANSWER:    They are usually in jail as a result of drugs, alcohol, sex, a woman, or all or any combination of the above.

Most of our male clients are in legal troubles up to their eyeballs because of a woman, usually one they loved at one time (and usually one who is not their mother).   From the angry baby mama who snitched, to the underaged stepdaughter who lied to police about her stepdad’s alleged sexual advances, to the vindictive soon-to-be-ex-wife who fabricates a battery charge in order to send her husband back to state prison for a probation violation.    It’s not just a trend.  It’s a sad fact of the matter that dysfunctional human relationships are at the core of most criminal cases we defend.

If this sounds familiar, you don’t need just a good lawyer or legal technician.  You need a great lawyer.  You need a lawyer who gets it.

That’s what separates the good lawyers from the great ones.  Those who understand human dynamics and the stuff of human relationships, the universality of the personal issues which underlie each and every criminal case.  One who can communicate with you and communicate about you while in front of a jury.  One who will resonate with the jury and who can tell your story in a compelling, compassionate way so that not just you and he/she get it, but so that the jury can get it, too.

The lawyers who do that the best are highly empathic and persuasive, in addition to being very skilled at what they do.   They have not only been around a courtroom, but they have been around the block.

We get it.  Sure, we know the law (and when we don’t, we know where to look it up), but mostly we know human relationships.  It’s ironic that world renowned scientist Albert Einstein was reported to have said, “Work on humanity, and forget all the rest.”  That one thought drives us to a great extent in every case we defend – not only in understanding the true humanity of a client but conveying to the jury the very core of exactly what happened, and who our client is.

By Jennifer Gardner

I won a felony child abuse case (Penal Code Section 273a(a)) this past Monday afternoon in Compton.  After 5 days of trial, the Jury deliberated for two and one-half hours, before they returned a verdict of not-guilty for my client, who is by far one of the most courageous young women I have ever met.  She refused all offers to plead, believing steadfastly that she did not do anything wrong.  She placed her trust in me, and her faith in the jurors, and they did the right thing.  Justice was served, and I am honored to have been a part of that.  I am humbled and proud to have stood by my client, in what were probably the scariest days of her life, and that she chose me as her lawyer.  Results like these make the loss of sleep, the long hours, and the price of gasoline well worth it.

We are often consulted by clients who are accused of having improper sexual contact with minors. The scenarios they present are endless: they range from a grandfather who is accused of inappropriately touching his granddaughter’s friend, to same sex individuals where one is age 15 at the time of the alleged sexual conduct.

Clients often ask us what crimes they might be charged with, how long the government has to file a case against them, and how long a sentence they might have to serve if they are convicted of any of these crimes. These questions are relatively straightforward. The answers, however, are not, especially where the alleged victim was a minor at the time the sexual contact occurred.

Here is an overview of the law that applies.

Overview of Potential Liability (or what claims could be alleged, what is the potential sentencing exposure and, what is the applicable statute of limitations):

Preliminarily, when computing statute of limitations in criminal matters, you must look at the potential sentencing exposure should there be a conviction. The length of the potential sentence often determines the statute of limitations. As you will see below, this is complicated when the crimes involve a minor (i.e., a person under the age of 18) and there is a wide age gap between the “victim” and the perpetrator.

The penalties for violating California’s “lewd acts with a minor” law vary, depending on the age of the child (and possibly the age difference between you and the minor), the specific facts of the case (for example, did the act involve force or violence?), and your criminal history. These factors will determine the length of any prison sentence that prosecutors could seek.

If prosecutors charge you with child molestation when the alleged victim is 14 or 15 years old, and if you are at least ten years older than the minor, the charge is what’s known as a wobbler. A “wobbler” can be filed as either a misdemeanor or as a felony. The only true difference between misdemeanor and felony sentencing for a “lewd acts with a minor” charge lays in (1) the fine, and (2) the potential jail/prison sentence. Misdemeanor child molestation subjects you to a maximum one-year county jail sentence and a maximum $1,000 fine. Felony charges subject you to one to eight years in state prison and a maximum $10,000 fine. In the event that you are significantly older than the minor in this case, you most likely will be charged with a felony. If you are convicted, you would most likely be sentenced to state prison (as distinguished from county jail) where you would serve your sentence.

Additionally, you face the following penalties which pertain to violating any California “lewd acts with a minor” law: Penal Code section 290 lifetime registration as a sex offender; a requirement that you pay for any medical or psychological treatment that the minor incurs as a result of the offense; and an additional and consecutive five-year state prison sentence if the minor suffers great bodily injury because you use force or violence during the offense (“great bodily injury” is significant or substantial physical injury).

You may be charged with Unlawful Sex with a Minor per Penal Code § 265.1 which provides, in pertinent part, as follows:

(a) Unlawful sexual intercourse is an act of sexual intercourse accomplished with a person who is not the spouse of the perpetrator, if the person is a minor. For the purposes of this section, a “minor” is a person under the age of 18 years and an “adult” is a person who is at least 18 years of age.

(b) Any person who engages in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who is not more than three years older or three years younger than the perpetrator, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

(c) Any person who engages in an act of unlawful sexualintercourse with a minor who is more than three years younger than the perpetrator is guilty of either a misdemeanor or a felony, and shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by imprisonment in the state prison.

(d) Any person 21 years of age or older who engages in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who is under 16 years of age is guilty of either a misdemeanor or a felony, and shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years.

You may also be charged with Rape in violation of Penal Code § 261. In that event, provided the prosecution alleges that the alleged victim did not consent, the potential sentences are as follows:

(c) (1) Any person who commits rape in violation of paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 261 upon a child who is under 14 years of age shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for 9, 11, or 13 years.

(2) Any person who commits rape in violation of paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 261 upon a minor who is 14 years of age or older shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for 7, 9, or 11 years.

Another potential count that could be filed would be for violation of Penal Code § 269, or Aggravated Sexual Assault of a Child, which provides as follows:

(a) Any person who commits any of the following acts upon a child who is under 14 years of age and seven or more years younger than the person is guilty of aggravated sexual assault of a child:

(1) Rape, in violation of paragraph (2) or (6) of subdivision (a) of Section 261. (2) Rape or sexual penetration, in concert, in violation of Section 264.1. (3) Sodomy, in violation of paragraph (2) or (3) of subdivision (c), or subdivision (d), of Section 286. (4) Oral copulation, in violation of paragraph (2) or (3) of subdivision (c), or subdivision (d), of Section 288a. (5) Sexual penetration, in violation of subdivision (a) of Section 289.

(b) Any person who violates this section is guilty of a felony and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for 15 years to life.

(c) The court shall impose a consecutive sentence for each offense that results in a conviction under this section if the crimes involve separate victims or involve the same victim on separate occasions as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 667.6.

There are also a variety of offenses that are related to Penal Code § 288 Child Molestation either because they are frequently charged in connection with a count for Lewd Act with a Minor, or are part of a Penal Code § 288 charge. These are the most common examples:

- California Penal Code § 288.2 – Harmful Matter Sent with the Intent of Seduction of a Minor: If you knowingly send or email erotic material to a minor with the intent of arousing yourself or the minor, you may be convicted of Penal Code § 288.2. An example would include chatting online with a child you believe to be 12 years old, and then emailing him/her a nude photo. This crime can be punished as a misdemeanor or felony, subjecting you to a county jail or state prison sentence.

- California Penal Code § 288.5 – Continuous Sexual Abuse of a Child: This crime involves engaging in three or more “acts of lewd or lascivious conduct” over a period of three months or longer, with a child under 14 years of age. A person convicted of Penal Code § 288.5 faces between 6 and 16 years of state prison.

- California Penal Code 243.4 - Sexual battery: Penal Code 243.4 “sexual battery” prohibits touching the intimate part of another for sexual arousal, gratification, or abuse. The difference between this law and Penal Code § 288 “lewd acts with a minor” is that “sexual battery” makes no mention of the victim’s age. If the minor was 14 or 15 and less than ten years younger than you or was 16 or 17, this is the offense with which prosecutors would likely charge you. A “sexual battery” charge may be filed as either a misdemeanor or as a felony.

How Statutes of Limitations are Computed For “Sex Crimes:”

The applicable statute of limitations is determined by reference to the maximum punishment possible under the statute.

If an offense is not punishable by death or imprisonment in a state prison, i.e., if it is a misdemeanor, the statute of limitations is ordinarily one year. See Penal Code § 802; People v Mincey (1992) 2 Cal.4th 408. For an offense punishable by imprisonment in a state prison for less than 8 years, the statute of limitations is ordinarily 3 years. See Penal Code § 801.

The statute of limitations that applies to a “wobbler” (a crime that may be charged either as a misdemeanor or as a felony) that is charged as a misdemeanor is determined by reference to the maximum felony sentence. See Penal Code § 805(a). When a misdemeanor is charged as a felony because of prior convictions, the felony statute of limitations applies. See Penal Code § 801; People v San Nicolas (1986) 185 Cal.App.3rd 403. If an offense is punishable by imprisonment of 8 years or more, the statute of limitations is ordinarily 6 years. See Penal Code § 800. [There is no statute of limitations for an offense that is punishable by death, imprisonment in state prison for life, or imprisonment for life without possibility of parole, or for an offense involving embezzlement of public money. See Penal Code § 79.]

There are some important exceptions to these rules, including cases which involve sex crimes against victims under 18 at the time of the offense (see Penal Code §§ 801.1(a) and 803(f)) and sex crimes when the suspect’s identity is later conclusively established by DNA testing (see Penal Code § 803(g)). Although the statute of limitations generally begins when the offense is committed (see, e.g., Penal Code § 802), for some crimes it does not begin to run until the crime is discovered. Penal Code § 803(c).

How the Time the Offense Occurred Impacts the Case Where Sex Crimes Are Alleged:

Although the charging document (which can be what’s called a complaint, information, or indictment) need not allege the exact date upon which the offense occurred, it must allege facts showing that the prosecution is not barred by the statute of limitations, and if the time elapsed exceeds the statute of limitations, the charging document must allege further facts, e.g., the defendant’s absence from the state for a sufficient period to toll the statute under Penal Code § 803(d). See also In re Demillo (1975) 14 Cal.3rd 598.

The following is an excerpt from the seminal handbook California criminal lawyers use on a daily basis, CALIFORNIA CRIMINAL LAW PROCEDURE AND PRACTICE (2011 ed.), which discusses how timing issues are problematic, especially in child sexual abuse cases:

Pleadings in cases involving repeated or continuous acts of child sexual abuse present special problems for the defense because the charging document may be vague about when the offense occurred, e.g., Count 1: a violation of Pen C § 288(a) between September 1, 2003, and December 31, 2003. The California Supreme Court has upheld such generic accusatory pleadings against due process challenge. See People v Jones (1990) 51 C3d 294, 317, 270 CR 611 (generic child molestation pleading does not deprive defendant of due process rights to notice and to present defense).

In Jones, the court observed that the defendant had a variety of procedural remedies to test the pleading, such as demurrers and pretrial motions to set aside the information or indictment (Pen C § 995 motion). 51 C3d at 320. However, the decision in People v Jennings (1991) 53 C3d 334, 356, 279 CR 780 (no due process notice violation in information that alleged offense occurred “on or about the summer of 1983”) suggests that a demurrer to generic child molestation charges is not likely to be successful. Defense counsel should demur but should also be prepared to pursue pretrial motions to dismiss under Penal Code § 995 (see chap 13) and to require the prosecutor to elect the specific incident on which he or she is relying to prove a particular count. See § 31.33. At trial, counsel should request a jury unanimity instruction. See CALCRIM 3550. See also People v Jones (1990) 51 C3d 294, 321, 270 CR 611.

“I think that any high-profile case exposes routine police work, and when you get into the guts of routine police work it is often not a pretty picture.”

EUGENE J. O’DONNELL, a professor of police studies at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, on the handling of the Strauss-Kahn case.

Bob Dylan turned 70 on May 24, 2011.On the occasion of his birthday, National Public Radio ran a great piece documenting how “Bob Dylan’s song lyrics are used more than any other writer’s in court opinions and briefs. . . [it] chronicles the artist’s influence on today’s legal community. From U.S. Supreme Court rulings to law school courses, Dylan’s words are used to convey messages about the law and courts gone astray.”

Listen here: http://tinyurl.com/3fxmxms.>

As it turns out, the Rolling Stones are the second most quoted band.  Can you guess what line courts use the most?  ”You Can’t Always Get What You Want.”

Thank you BitterLawyer for your humor about the legal profession. Even people who are lawyers and people who need lawyers could use a good laugh. Click on the links below to see what I mean:  The first must see:  3hda9ao

and the second…….     43wyufy

This story is c r a z y!  http://tinyurl.com/63esfwo Check out this story about a solicitation-for-murder case in Florida.

I appeared in court today on a civil matter.  Downtown.  Supposedly the second largest courthouse in the world, where the judges allegedly outwork the lawyers and lack the resources and time to work through the huge volume of cases on their calendars.  If I faced unending piles of work and unrelenting pressure, I would be stressed out too.  But I would not take out my anger on two lawyers who were doing me a favor by agreeing to remove a case from my courtroom and to go instead to private arbitration.

The insurmountable workload could plausibly explain the foul mood this judge was in this Monday morning.   She was so extremely rude to opposing counsel and to me – mostly to opposing counsel because she was angry at him for not zealously prosecuting his case (I represent the defendant).  She was so unpleasant – even after we informed her that our clients have agreed to arbitrate – she screamed at us, “you’re too late!! You’re going to trial!!!” – as if going to trial is some form of cruel and unusual punishment, which for me at least, it is anything but.

Eventually, we explained the statute (CCP Section 1280, et seq.) our clients had elected to arbitrate under.  As she read our stipulation, she could not find any fault with it, and even after we politely pointed out to her that she was flat-out wrong about the law, she still did not change her nasty, impatient demeanor.  As she grilled us, I looked at the many pictures of her with her children on her desk and bookcase, and I thought to myself that I do not know what I would have done had I grown up with a mother like that. “Go ahead!  File what you need to file!  All I can say is what a waste of money.  Too bad we’re not on the record so that everyone else out there can hear this!,” she screamed at us as we finally left her chambers.

I agree with her, that the plaintiff in our case has spent a lot of money pushing a lawsuit through a courthouse over the last year for almost no damn reason, except to agree to arbitrate on the eve of trial.  But to me, that does not excuse her viciously unprofessional temperament.   To me, taking abuse from stressed out judges is not something I ever imagined or wanted to experience when I went to law school.  Why do they call this the “civil” system when it is anything but?  I may never find all the answers to that question, but at least now I know why all the other lawyers in that courtroom were so nervously sitting, waiting for their cases to be called.

By Mark McBride
Let’s start at the beginning, and I’ll start out by stating the obvious.

Criminal defense attorneys who take serious cases with allegedly really bad / graphic facts are not particularly well liked.  There are basically three types of criminal defense attorneys:  1) those who take such cases; 2) those who take such cases and plead their client guilty when their client doesn’t want to plead guilty; and 3) those who take serious cases to trial, and “leave it all on the field” by doing their very best to win, no matter how bad the facts or how high the stakes or the amount of time and work involved.

Jen and I are in the latter category.

But this blog posting is not so much about Jen and me as it is about something entirely different — something which we encounter when taking serious criminal cases to trial.
This blog posting is about what Jen and I call “The Silence.”

The Silence occurs when you, as a criminal defense attorney, are in a courtroom full of people in a really serious case, and you are arguing matters which go right to the substance of the case – for example — police dishonesty (when that officer is in the courtroom), prosecutorial misconduct (where the prosecutor obviously is in the courtroom), or where you disagree with the judge because you believe that he or she might well be wrong on a critical ruling, etc.  The Silence occurs when you can not not make that argument, even though the prosecutor and the court may think you are wrong about it, even though you might very well be wrong about it, and if you are wrong, it might be very embarrassing to make that argument; but in that moment you have single-minded clarity which is that you must make this argument in order to do your duty of zealously representing your client.

When you argue matters of this much substance and controversy, when you make it clear that you are not going to “go along by getting along,” when you are clearly risking being wrong in order to do what you believe in that moment you must do for your client, the courtroom gets entirely silent.  You can hear a pin drop — literally.  All eyes are on you, and you are staking your reputation, your credibility, and, quite possibly, the credibility of your client’s entire case on an argument which you believe you must make no matter how alarming it may sound to those who hear it, even to yourself.

This is when this work is especially difficult.  It takes nerves of steel to stick your neck out there and make these arguments when you are afraid to make them and afraid if you don’t.

I have encountered The Silence many times in courtrooms regarding allegedly egregious cases.  So many times.

One example which comes to mind is when I knew a prosecutor was lying about not having wiretaps, and I asked the judge not to take her word for it but to put her on the stand and let me cross-examine her about the issue, under oath.  The jaws of perhaps 50 people in that courtroom hit the floor.

Another example which comes to mind is obviously the extremely difficult, but harrowing, task of having to cross-examine a child victim in front of a jury.  Despite a raft of articles, books, and seminars on this topic, there is no easy way to do this, even if the judge allows it to occur in chambers outside the presence of the jury.  In these situations, The Silence is about as intense as it gets.

So, if you, a potential client, are facing serious charges and want to go to the mat, come meet Jen and me.  Come meet us.  Look into our eyes, spend some time with us, and get to know us.  You’ll like what you see, and you’ll know, first and foremost and in your heart, that Jen and I are used to, and can handle, The Silence.

We did alot of good work here last year.  We don’t often publicize the cases we are working on, but here are some highlights of what we accomplished in 2010:

Criminal:

- client acquitted of all counts in a felony sexual battery and false imprisonment case.

- client acquitted of all counts in a felony child endangerment case.

- second degree murder case dismissed following preliminary hearing.

- felony DUI/DWI causing injury case reduced to misdemeanor.

- felony terrorist threats case reduced to misdemeanor, and then dismissed.

- numerous cases either not filed or dismissed after charging.

Civil:

- victory for client in real estate partition/domestic partnership dissolution case; client obtained damages totaling $975,000.

- two equitable easements obtained in two separate cases for clients who live next to nasty neighbors in the hills of Los Angeles.

- settlement obtained for client who purchased horse property from a real estate broker/seller who misrepresented that room additions were built according to building codes.

- following arbitration, medical partnership successfully dissolved.

Personal:

- Mark had a baby girl.

- Natasha had a baby boy.

- Jennifer started cutting real cows.  (see http://www.nchacutting.com)

According to California law, domestic violence means abuse committed against an adult or a fully emancipated minor who is a spouse, former spouse, cohabitant, former cohabitant, or person with whom the suspect has had a child or is having or has had a dating or engagement relationship.  California Penal Code 13700(b)

Domestic violence affects people of all races, ages and genders.   While statistics show that most victims are female, men can be and often are victims of domestic violence.

Courts take domestic violence allegations extremely seriously.  The charges can be filed as a felony or misdemeanor against any type of domestic partner, meaning someone with whom you share your home.   This includes relatives, step-parents, children, boyfriends, girlfriends, same-sex partners and spouses.   Throughout the state, District Attorneys and City Attorneys have set up special units in their offices that aggressively focus on the large volume of domestic violence cases that are filed each year.  The reason for this is clear:  deaths attributable to domestic violence-related arguments are on the rise, with females being the usual victims.  Indeed, statistics show the following:

1.  A large percentage of female homicide victims are spouses of the offenders;

2.  A large number of homicides where the victim is 40 years of age or older occur between relatives;

3.  One-quarter of all homicides (and one-half of all cases where a female is the victim) occur in the victim’s home;

4.   The greatest percentage of homicide victims between ages 30 – 39 and 40 and over are killed as a result of argument-related conflicts.

(See Homicide in California 2008, California Department of Justice, Division of California Justice Information Services, Bureau of Criminal Information and Analysis Criminal Justice Statistics Center.)

At Gardner + Associates, we understand that relationships are complex and can be difficult.  People often argue, and arguments often escalate.   Our understanding of human dynamics can only help you if you are charged with a domestic violence crime.    We have experience in representing men and women alike who are charged with this type of crime.   We also help people in obtaining Restraining Orders where they fear that one is necessary in order to help them deal with an explosive and often dangerous domestic situation.

If you are charged with domestic violence, do not speak directly to the police or detectives.   Nothing you can say will help you and can and will only be used against you.   You should immediately contact a Los Angeles domestic violence criminal defense attorney who will immediately assist you and who will aggressively defend you and preserve your rights.    At Gardner + Associates, we are dedicated to aggressively defending the rights of our clients, to exposing exaggerated accusations and to fighting cases that have been over-charged.   We will help you navigate through this difficult, emotionally charged process, and do everything legally possible to obtain a dismissal or acquittal.

This is an amazing story on CNN today about how inmates are getting to break wild Mustangs in Nevada.

The cowgirl in me loves this concept.  It’s win-win for everyone.

By Jennifer Gardner

There is nothing more professionally fulfilling than winning a case for a client – especially where the stakes are so high, as they were for our client last week.  He was over-charged with felony child endangerment, and the Compton DA essentially failed to realistically assess the circumstances surrounding the case, refused to make a reasonable settlement offer of a plea, and forced our client to go to trial.   That’s what’s known as a “free trial.”  In other words, our client had no choice but to go to trial.  And, given the facts of the case, it was clear that if he wanted to win, he would have to testify.

More than our client’s freedom was at stake in this trial:  the future of an entire family was at stake.   Our client has been in this country for the last 37 of his 38 years, and he is a permanent resident.  These days, whenever any non-US citizen is convicted of any type of crime involving abuse or harm or even risk of harm to a child, they face deportation straight from prison and/or jail.  The same is true if they are convicted of a misdemeanor involving the same allegations (although some immigration attorneys will tell you that at least under that scenario, they have a “fighting chance”).   Our client has raised his 17-year-old daughter here, his whole family is here, and his fiancée is 7 months pregnant with their baby.  If we lost this case, he would be “outta here” in no time, after doing his time.  The emotional ramifications of a potential loss were palpable, and they set heavily on my shoulders during the last few months.

What made this even worse was the fact that our client was the victim of someone else’s mistake of judgment.  He was, as many of our clients are, the unwitting victim of a third party’s misdeed.    He did not actively do or intend to do anything wrong, nor did he fail to act any differently than an ordinary reasonable person under the circumstances.

"Bionicos"

The trouble began when he parked his car in a parking lot, under the shade of a tree, and left his keys, and his fiancée and her 2-year-old in the car, in order to run inside the store to buy a “bionico.”  What’s a bionico?  A fresh fruity dish with yogurt, raisins, coconut.  It’s delicious.    The problem occurred when his fiancée left the car for a few minutes with her child inside in order to join him in the store to change her order because her cell phone had died.   Even though the couple immediately returned to the car, within minutes – police swarmed the vehicle.  The child was not injured at all, but my client was arrested and charged as if he had masterminded the crime of the century.

Our guy had to tell his side of the story.  We had to place our faith and trust in the judgment of 12 jurors – total strangers who we hoped would plainly see the situation here for what it was, and our client for who he is – a loving, caring father and boyfriend who tried to do something nice when things went very wrong.   Lo and behold, they did.    The jury acquitted him on both counts after deliberating for about half an hour.   Victory is sweet, especially for our client and his family.  I slept very well this weekend, my faith in people restored, at least for the time being.