New legislation has been introduced to Congress to equalize the sentencing for crack and cocaine drug offenses.  Currently, there is a 100-1 sentencing disparitybetween convictions for offenses involing “crack” or “powder cocaine.”   The legisitation, called the Fair Sentencing Act of 2009, would equalize the sentencing guidelines for these two drug offenses. 

It started with the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986, which at the time was designed to aggressively target the increase in crack cocaine crime.  Under the law, those convicted of crimes involving “crack” cocaine were punished on a 100-to-1 ratio compared to those whose crimes involve cocaine in powder form.  Thus, a person who dealt five grams of crack cocaine (the weight of two pennies) could face 5 years in prison…. but person had to deal 500 grams of powder cocaine for a similar sentence.   Worse, as the years went on, some reports indicated that first-time offenders caught selling five grams of powder cocaine typically only received 6 months in prison, and would often be eligible for probation, while first-time offender selling the same amount of crack faced the mandatory five year prison sentence.  Another disparity was that the majority of dealers convicted for crack cocaine offenses were Black, while most convicted for powder cocaine offenses were White.  

Given the unfairness of the drug policies, several organizations advocated for a change in the “100:1″ crack-cocaine sentencing laws and it was one ofPresident Obama’s campaign pledges to equalize the punishment for the offenses.  Under the new laws, a person would have to be caught with 500 grams of crack cocaine to go to prison – same as for powder cocaine.  

There are many policy reasons behind the push for the new law – primarily to address the racial disparities mentioned, but also to refocus law enforcement efforts on drug king-pins rather than street-level dealers.

Even if you don’t watch the television program “COPS,” you might wonder the most common reasons people get arrested.  Well, you’re in luck because the FBI reports on just that topic!  According to the FBI/DOJ Report, Crime in the United States 2008, there were about 14 million arrests last year.  There were more arrests for property crimes than any other crime - about 1.7 million arrests.  Theft ranks next on the list after property crimes, ranking in at an estimated 1.2 million arrests or so.  Here is the chart from the FBI website:

If you’ve been charged with a crime, you need to protect your legal rights.  Consult an attorney as soon as possible regarding the charges, the circumstances of your arrest, and the facts of your case.  You have the right to have a lawyer present during any questioning.  A criminal defense attorney can advise you about your rights, what the prosecution must prove in order to convict you of the offense charged, and how the evidence in your case will likely impact the result.  An attorney can also help negotiate a favorable plea bargain and advocate for the most favorable sentencing for any conviction.  For more information about being charged with a crime, or to find a criminal defense attorney, visit LawInfo’s Legal Resource Center or search for an attorney in your area using our attorney directory.

Is medical marijuana legal now?  Well, not exactly.  While the legality of marijuana use is still a bit tricky – illegal under federal law, but legal in certain states – the Obama administration has decided NOT to arrest people who use or supply medical marijuana in conformity with their state’s laws.   

Remember the song… “I’m just a bill… on Capital Hill…”? In some ways, recalling our first lesson about “separation of powers” is helpful to this conversation.  In the U.S., what we think of as “the law” is really a collaboration of sorts – the Legislative Branch (Congress / state legislatures) makes the laws, the Judicial Branch (the courts) interprets the laws, and the Executive Branch (the President, police, etc.) enforce the laws.  When it comes to the topic of medical marijuana, each branch of the government has weighed in: 

Legislative:  Under federal law, any marijuana use is illegal.  Under certain state laws, however,  the use of marijuana is “legal” for certain medical purposes (see state medical marijuana laws in:  Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington).

Judicial:  The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Gonzales v. Raich that the federal government could enforce federal laws against marijuana use under the federal Controlled Substances, despite state medical marijuana laws legalizing such uses.

Executive/Law Enforcement:  Depends on the President. During the Bush administration, hundreds of raids on medical marijuana use/supply were conducted and thousands were arrested.  The Obama administration is doing the opposite… 

The penalties for marijuana offenses, like for other substances, depend on the quantity at issues, as shown in the following chart from the U.S. Department of Justice website (see:    http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/agency/penalties.htm): 

  Federal Trafficking Penalties – Marijuana

In 2008, there were about 1.8 million arrests for drug offenses – and about half of them were for marijuana related offenses (approximately 5.5% of the total arrests were for marijuana sales/trafficking; approximately 44.3% of the total arrests were for marijuana possession).  (See:  DOJ/FBI Arrest Tables – 2008 Crime in the United States.)  Of course, not all of those marijuana arrests were arrests related to the use/supply of medical marijuana, though certainly some of them were. 

While law enforcement will continue to investigate, arrest and prosecute people involved in marijuana trafficking, sales to minors, violent and weapons-related marijuana activities, etc., the Obama administration won’t arrest those involved with legitimate medical marijuana activities.   Aside from the policy discussion, this shift in law enforcement could mean that more attorneys will be needed to advise clients about licensing and compliance with medical marijuana laws.  For more information – and links to state laws legalizing medical marijuana (or permitting some uses), click here.

According to the latest press release from the U.S. Department of Justice, suspects have been charged with data breach crimes in the largest alleged credit and debit card data breach ever in the United States.  Apparently, data related to more than 130 Million credit and debit cards was stolen by the criminals when they hacked into the computer systems of major retailers and payment card processors.  Albert Gonzalez, 28, of Miami, Fla., “and his co-conspirators, used a “sophisticated hacking technique called an “SQL injection attack,” to break past a computer system’s firewall to gain access to what would otherwise be secure information. 

Ever used your debit card at 7-11?  Well, then you’re card information might have been stored there.  Apparently, 7-Eleven was one of the retailers targeted by the hackers.  The hackers also targeted Heartland Payment Systems, a New Jersey-based card payment processor.  When an electronic payment card is used, the card numbers are stored electronically… the information is then transmitted to your account so that funds can be withdrawn according to the payment made.  Companies are required by various state and federal laws to implement sophisticated technologies protecting the safety of your card information.  However, a hacker’s job is to find ways around these protections. 

Does this mean your financial information isn’t secure?  Well… the answer is probably more like the answer about how safe it is to drive a car on the road.  There are a lot of rules and protections in place so that you don’t get into an accident on the road, but that doesn’t mean rules don’t get broken sometimes.  Same thing here sort of.  The payment systems are equipped with a variety of technologies to keep your financial information safe on the electronic superhighway, but that doesn’t mean the rules don’t get broken sometimes.

The best thing to do is to review your financial accounts regularly for any errors or disputed activity.  Contact law enforcement if you believe your financial accounts have been hacked or you’ve been a victim of identity theft. 

For more on these topics, check out LawInfo’s Free Legal Resource Center or contact an attorney today. 

Read the Department of Justice press  release by clicking here.

These days, when layoffs are large and new jobs are scarce, you might be considering even moving away in order to take a new job in a different location.  So you search for movers on the internet, find the best deal out there (because a lot of new jobs these days aren’t covering relocation expenses) and pack up your belongings in time for moving day.  Once the movers get to your home, you’re rushed through the paperwork and all the boxes and furniture are loaded onto the truck.  … and then &*@ BAMB!  … something awful happens….   The movers tell you that the loading of your belongings took longer than originally estimated, or that your move required additional moving materials, or some other reason that the move is going to cost you MORE MONEY.  All this happens, of course, AFTER your worldly assets are already on the truck… 

Sound scary, right?  Well, it turns out this scenario is a real-life scam the FBI calls “moving fraud.”  In fact, the FBI reported that thousands of people were victimized in this fashion by 16 Florida-based moving companies.  Check out the FBI information page about it by clicking here.

Fraud is a crime.  If you’ve been a victim of moving fraud, or any other white collar crime, contact local law enforcement to make a complaint.  Also, contact an attorney to determine what legal options may be available either to recover your stolen possessions or seek money damages from the perpetrators.

Credit card and debit card fraud is more widespread than in the past.  In fact, the FTC reports that such fraud costs hundreds of millions of dollars each year in losses to cardholders as well as the credit card companies and issuers.  It can happen in a variety of ways ranging from the theft of your wallet or purse to “dumpster diving” (rummaging through your trash) to find copies of your card card or bank statements.  Thieves can even watch you enter your credit card number into your  mobile phone from a distance away – called “shoulder surfing” and listen in on your conversation to capture additional sensitive information.  In many cases, thieves may even be using your credit card without you even realizing the unauthorized charges are being made to your account. 

As soon as you realize your credit or debit card has been lost or stolen, or you notice unauthorized charges to your account, contact the issuer immediately to report the problem.  There are a variety of laws in place designed to limit your liability for the charges if you report it promptly.  Also, many issuers offer “zero liability” programs which also strive to limit your liability for the unauthorized charges to your account when promptly reported.  Once you report it, the law protects you against any further unauthorized charges.  Also, visit any of the three credit bureaus, Equifax, Experian, or TransUnion, for more information or to place a fraud alert on your credit report.

No matter how careful you are, though, fraud still does happen sometimes.  Here are a few tips from the FBI to help minimize your chances of becoming a victim of credit card fraud:

• Don’t give out your credit card number(s) online unless the site is a secure and reputable site. Sometimes a tiny icon of a padlock appears to symbolize a higher level of security to transmit data. This icon is not a guarantee of a secure site, but might provide you some assurance.
• Don’t trust a site just because it claims to be secure.
• Before using the site, check out the security/encryption software it uses.
• Make sure you are purchasing merchandise from a reputable source.
• Do your homework on the individual or company to ensure that they are legitimate.
• Try to obtain a physical address rather than merely a post office box and a phone number, call the seller to see if the number is correct and working.
• Send them e-mail to see if they have an active e-mail address and be wary of sellers who use free e-mail services where a credit card wasn’t required to open the account.
• Consider not purchasing from sellers who won’t provide you with this type of information.
• Check with the Better Business Bureau from the seller’s area.
• Check out other web sites regarding this person/company.
• Don’t judge a person/company by their web site.
• Be cautious when responding to special offers (especially through unsolicited e-mail).
• Be cautious when dealing with individuals/companies from outside your own country.
• The safest way to purchase items via the Internet is by credit card because you can often dispute the charges if something is wrong.
• Make sure the transaction is secure when you electronically send your credit card numbers.
• You should also keep a list of all your credit cards and account information along with the card issuer’s contact information. If anything looks suspicious or you lose your credit card(s) you should contact the card issuer immediately.

In addition to the tips above, the U.S. Department of Justice has a catchy phrase to help you remember important ways to protect yourself.  You just remember the word “SCAM”:

“S”  –    Be stingy about giving out your personal information to others unless you have a reason to trust them, regardless of where you are at home, traveling, talking on the telephone, or otherwise;
“C”  –    Check your financial information regularly, and look for what should be there and what shouldn’t; 
“A”  –    Ask periodically for a copy of your credit report.
“M”  –    Maintain careful records of your banking and financial accounts.

Bernie Madoff will be spending a lot of time in prison after being sentenced to a term of 150 years for his financial crimes.  Sure, it is one of the strongest sentences for while collar crimes to date.  But, that’s what you get for several counts of securities fraud, investment advisor fraud, mail fraud, money laundering and theft…     In his 70’s now, Madoff has essentially received a life sentence in prison for conducting a multi-billion dollar ponzi scheme. 

Madoff defrauded a lot of people.. including some pretty smart and financially savvy people.  So, if even so called “sophisticated investors” can become victims of this kind of fraud, how is the average person supposed to protect themselves against it? 

The FBI has a handy little test on its website:  Don’t Be Cheated – Test Your Fraud Awareness.  Check it out…. you might be surprised by the results. 

For more information about white collar crime or other criminal law matters, contact a criminal defense attorney or  white collar crime lawyer.  You can also visit LawInfo’s Free Legal Resource Center to learn more about the law.

With a high speed chase, you might only hear those police sirens for a few seconds before the cars come whizzing by you on the street.  Sometimes, maybe not even long even to property move over to the curb – or at least get partially out of the way!  Too often, however, those high speed police chases cause accidents and injure the innocent drivers on the road.   The courts were then faced with having to decide whether, or to what extent, a police officer could be liable to an injured driver for causing an accident as a result of a high speed chase.  I mean, if regular drivers who speed through the streets and intersections cause and accident, they’re liable to those they’ve injured.  Why shouldn’t the police be liable for causing the same accident?

Well, it’s not that simple I guess.  They’re in the “line of duty,” driving “authorized emergency vehicles,” and pursuing criminals.  State laws even provide for a limitation of liability.  For example, California Vehicle Code Section 17004 states the following:

“A public employee is not liable for civil damages on account of personal injury to or death of any person or damage to property resulting from the operation, in the line of duty, of an authorized emergency vehicle while responding to an emergency call or when in the immediate pursuit of an actual or suspected violator of the law, or when responding to but not upon returning from a fire alarm or other emergency call.”

By enacting these kinds of liability-limiting laws for police and other emergency vehicles, “we the people” have decided that the interests of justice are served by granting the police “immunity” from prosecution for injuries that may occur during pursuing fleeing suspects.  Many of those suspects who flee have just committed serious crimes – car jacking, murder, robbery… but sometimes police conduct high speed pursuits over less serious offenses.  If the police were prohibited from speeding to chase after them…. the suspects would simply just get away.

But the line has to be drawn somewhere.   Some might argue that all high speed chases endanger the innocent other drivers on the road – that the police act in “reckless disregard” for the safety of the public on the roadway when they conduct a high speed chase.  Even further, sometimes the way in which a high speed police car pursuit is conducted actually “shocks the conscience” of the community.  For instance, would a high speed chase in excess of 100 mph along neighborhood streets in front of an elementary school be okay in pursuit of a minor traffic offender? If a 6-year old girl was killed by the police car while she crossed the street to go home… well, we might then look at that high speed chase and determine that it not only was in “reckless disregard for public safety,” but that it does in fact “shock the conscience.”

The courts have struggled over the years with what should be the standard for determining if a high speed chase was dangerous enough to hold law enforcement liable for violating our constitutional due process rights in connection with injuries sustained from such high speed chase.   Should it be a police pursuit that is simply “reckless”… or should it be only if a high speed chase is so reckless that there is a “conscious, knowing disregard for human life and safety”… or should it be the even higher standard of only when a high speed pursuit under the circumstances actually downright “shocks our conscience.”   Conduct that “shocks the conscience” is conduct that is “deliberately intended to injure in some way unjustifiable by any government interest.”  The “shock the conscience” standard is currently in use by the courts.  

The issue is incredibly important from a policy perspective because if the standard for constitutional liability is very high, then law enforcement will rarely be found liable.  If the standard is lower, more liability will be found, which will result in fewer apprehensions of criminals.

If you’re interested, you can read some of the court cases on this topic below: 

U.S. Supreme Court – COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. TERI LEWIS AND THOMAS LEWIS, PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF PHILIP LEWIS, DECEASED, May 26, 1998.

9th Circuit Court of Appeals – Noni ONOSSIAN; Cyril Onossian; Herve Onossian, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Sherman BLOCK; Michael Antonovich; Deane Dana; Ed
Edelman; Kenneth Hahn; Gloria Molina; County of Los Angeles; Daniel Finn; Larry Yates; Bruce Thomas, & One Hundred Unknown Named Employees & or Officials of County of Los Angeles, Defendants-Appellees, May 26, 1999.

As reported in the media, James W. Von Brunn wanted the world to know the depth of his hate by opening fire with a shotgun at the patrons of the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington D.C.  Unfortunately, hate-driven crimes such as this are not uncommon.  According to the FBI, law enforcement agencies reported 7,624 hate crime incidents involving 9,006 offenses in 2007 alone (more recent data not yet available). 

A “hate crime” can be any crime (like murder, arson, assault, or burglary, etc.), but which is motivated by the offender’s bias or prejudice against a particular race, religion, disability, ethnic origin or sexual orientation.  As distinguished by the FBI, though, “hate itself is not a crime,” since every citizen has the freedom of free speech and to have their own opinions.  But when a prejudice, anger, disregard, disrespect, or other “hate” for someone (or a class of people) to inflict harm or engage in violence, that hate-motivated crime is a “hate crime.”

Hate crimes and terrorism and hate-motivated threats have been more in the forefront of our minds, perhaps, since 9/11.  Though, brave men and women have been combating those evils in the background for many years as such hate crimes are not new.  It is on days like this that I am again reminded of those brave men and women in law enforcement who dedicate their lives to resolving these threats.

If you’ve been a victim of a hate crime, or other crime victim, visit LawInfo’s Free Legal Resource Center to learn more about crime victims’ rights.  You can also find an attorney or a private investigator at LawInfo as well.  www.lawinfo.com.

The fight for marriage equality will rage on another day. On Tuesday, May 26th, California’s Supreme Court ruled to uphold the state’s gay-marriage ban, also known as Proposition 8. The 6-1 decision by Chief Justice Ron George rejected an argument from activists that Proposition 8 revised the California constitution’s equal protection clause.

Although the Court also ruled that the 18,000 same-sex weddings that took place before the prohibition passed are still valid and it would be too disruptive to apply Prop 8 retroactively, activists said they would go back to the voting public as soon as possible to repeal the ban.

The California Supreme Court ruled 4-3 last May that it was unconstitutional to deny gay couples the right to wed. Since that time, same-sex couples from around the country came to California to wed before this ruling made its way to the voters during the 2008 election. Consequently, Proposition 8 did pass with a 52% approval. As the fight raged on in California, Iowa, Maine, Vermont and Connecticut legalized gay marriage.

Although the court ruled that the ban denies gay couples use of the term “marriage,” California still allows gay couples to form domestic partnerships and does not “disturb the basic right to establish an officially recognized and protected family relationship with the person of one’s choice and to raise children within the family.”

So what are your thoughts? Was justice upheld today based upon the voice of the voters, or was the decree of our Constitution challenged today and overruled? No matter what side of the fence you stand on this issue, there is a long fight ahead that will impact our country and that of generations to come.