California Criminal Lawyer Blog

by Teri Sforza, Register staff writer

Perhaps the question is not if the county will settle this lawsuit, but when, and for how much…?

It’s not going well when a federal judge writes, “a reasonable jury could conclude that the defendant officers used excessive force against Ms. White …. Ms. White was not under suspicion of having committed any crime. Nor were the officers present to investigate Ms. White. Indeed, the officers were standing on Ms. White’s property without having obtained a warrant ….”

OUCH

We told you recently about the case involving an Old English sheep dog, a woman named Toy (who suffered a nasty black eye), and an Orange County Sheriff’s deputy who was arrested for DUI after two crashes within a half-hour.

Mission Viejo paid $24,000 to make this suit go away – but it is still grinding against former Deputy Allan James Waters’ bosses, the County of Orange and the Sheriff’s Department, racking up legal bills.

(Waters, by the way, is no longer a deputy. And shortly after he turned in his uniform, he was arrested for DUI and on suspicion of being a drug dealer who traded fake drugs and cash in exchange for real prescription drugs. The District Attorney’s Office said he tried to pull a fast one by using a white powder instead of cocaine. Oops.)

The county has settled one other case involving Deputy Waters for $32,000.

DOG GONE

On July 7, 2007, Toy Whitewas home in Mission Viejo with her husband Steve and their three Old English sheep dogs. A woman entered the property without permission, the suit says - and one of the dogs bit her.

That evening, there was a knock at the Whites’ door. They opened it, and there stood four OC sheriff’s deputies and a Mission Viejo animal control officer. They entered the house without the Whites’ consent – and without a warrant - demanding that the dog be surrendered for a 10-day quarantine.

Mission Viejo law allows for in-home quarantine when a bite happens during trespassing on private property. The Whites said they wanted to do that instead.

And here, according to the suit filed in federal court, is where things got dicey. The deputies became threatening and said, “Just give up the dog,” the suit says.

Toy White asked the officers to leave her house; they would continue the discussion outside. As she placed her hand on the door handle, “she was violently grabbed and thrown face first onto the tile floor, without warning or provocation, by (deputies) Macias and Waters,” the suit says. She was then cuffed tightly, arrested, and hauled off to jail.

The dog, meanwhile, was taken into custody as well. The dog was returned the following day, when the city realized its error; but White was arrested for battery on an officer and resisting arrest. The District Attorney’s office did not proceed, however, determining that the officers had no authority to enter the house, and no legal right to remove the dog, the suit says.

Deputies named, along with Waters, are J. Macias, S. Crivelli and T. Jansen, along with animal control officer H. Holmes. They maintain that White was threatening, advanced toward the deputies and resisted arrest.

SAYS THE JUDGE

The suit is in federal court, before Judge David O. Carter. He made the comments we’re quoting in an order granting in part, and denying in part, the county’s motion for summary judgment (a determination made by the court without a full trial).

Writes Carter: “…it remains a disputed issue of material fact as to whether Ms. White made any contact with the police officers. Even if Ms. White made such contact, the officers would only be entitled to use the force necessary in the circumstances, which was minimal since the officers concede that Ms. White was in the office of closing the front door to Plaintiffs’ residence and thereby imposing a physical barrier between herself and the officers.

“To the extent the officers now claim it was necessary to physically restrain Ms. White in order to effectively combat the harm alleged to have been caused by the Plaintiffs’ dog, the Court is unconvinced. It is for a jury to determine whether Ms. White’s restraint was a reasonable response to the threat that a dog inside Plaintiffs’ home posed a public safety risk. But the mere fact that Ms. White resisted the officers’ attempts to enter her residence without a warrant is far from a legitimate basis for the officers’ actions on July 7, 2007.”

The Whites’ attorney, Mary Frances Prevost, is understandably encouraged. She doesn’t completely understand why the county doesn’t cut its losses here, but postulates that it’s the way the system is set up. Lawyers make more money when cases go to trial, she says. Lawyers make less money when cases settle.

[california civil rights attorney, san diego civil rights attorney, orange county civil rights attorney, riverside civil rights attorney, imperial county civil rights attorney, san francisco civil rights attorney, ventura vicil rights attorney, santa barbara civil rights attorney]

Continue reading "CALIFORNIA CIVIL RIGHTS ATTORNEY - JUDGE SAYS: ORANGE COUNTY SHERIFF DEPUTIES MAY HAVE USED EXCESSIVE FORCE" »

I have been posting on this issue for a long time. And it's been too long since the County of Orange decided not to settle this horrible case.

Instead, the County of Orange is protecting a dirty cop who crashed in a DUI accident, beat another person and settled the case, sold "bunk" (fake drugs) to get money, and beat a 5'2" cosmetics representative to the ground in her own home.

Well, when the firm of Sullivan & Ballog, who are defending the rogue cops in this case, tried to get the case kicked out of court, the judge said "No!"

Here's the article:

http://taxdollars.ocregister.com/2010/07/12/officers-used-excessive-force-ruling-suggests/60459/

Orange County Deputy Sheriff Allen Waters has just been arrested for felony DUI and sales of drugs in the OC jail.

http://taxdollars.freedomblogging.com/2010/06/09/deputy-trades-in-sheriffs-green-for-jailhouse-orange/58819/

Waters is well known for being part of a conspiracy with one of his Sheriff buddies who caught him drunk driving. The law enforcement friend stopped Waters for drunk driving and let him go. Shortly after, he slammed into a little old woman, seriously injuring her and causing her to be sent to the hospital in an ambulance.

http://www.californiacriminallawyerblog.com/2010/03/california_dui_defense_orange.html

He is also the deputy that settled a civil rights suit when he burst into a man's home and beat him to the ground.

http://www.californiacriminallawyerblog.com/bad_cop_no_donut/

When will the Orange County taxpayers rise up and demand that their taxpayer dollars be spent on school and human services rather than line the pockets of the big civil firms that are hired by the County at the behest of the police unions to protect the dirty cops? When?

When will Orange County take resposibility for this thug? The County has already spent, what I estimate to be over $100,000 in attorney fees and costs representing this bad apple cop. Why won't they protect Toy White, an innocent taxpayer who was brutalized by this thug cop after he burst into her house along with Crivelli, Macias and Jansen, and dogcatcher Holmes? Why is SHE not protected?

On December 27, 2005, Ron Capizzi filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the County of Orange and a bunch of rogue Orange County deputy sheriffs.

After three grueling years of all out litigation, including the taking of every deposition possible at the cost of tens of thousands of dollars in litigations costs, the case finally settled on the eve of trial for $38,000 on December 15, 2008.

Three years of litigation. Tens of thousands of dollars in litigation costs. Why didn't this case settle sooner?

The answer is easy. Counties and cities hire outside counsel to represent them in such cases. It is not valuable to a private civil law firm to settle a case early. The interest of the law firm is to bill the county for the largest amount possible. Settling the case early is a conflict. The best interest of the county is generally not the best interest of the law firm.

What happened in the Capizzi case is typical of outside law firms billing the taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars in costs and attorney fees for cases that should be handled quickly and settled immediately. I suspect, and will soon find out, that the Santa Ana law firm of Sullivan & Ballog billed more than 100,000 in costs and fees to the County of Orange over those three years. It's public record.

And what did the county get out of it? A big bill. The county and it's cops got thrown under the bus. After all that time, they finally gave money to the Plaintiff. But they gave much, much more money to the attorney who defended him. The cops didn't win. The County didn't win. The plaintiff and his attorney didn't win. But Santa Ana law firm Sullivan & Ballog won big.

Now, it's happening again. The same Santa Ana lawfirm is billing, billing, billing on the case of Toy White v. County of Orange. (A separate law firm also just settled a different case by a different lawfirm against Deputy Allan Waters, one of the cops in the White case on the even of trial. Click HERE for the story. We'll be getting those costs and fees, too).

You will remember that Toy White is the 5'1" cosmetics rep who was brutally beaten to the ground when the dogcatcher and a band of four - count 'em FOUR - heavily armed Orange County deputy sheriff's burst into her house to take her dog that had been involved in a minor bite. They didn't have the right. They had no warrant. There was no legal cause to bust into her house and slam her to the floor, other than what they made up in their reports to justifies their actions. See HERE for story in the Orange County Register.

The City of Mission Viejo, who employed the dogcatcher, settled the case. But it's not amazing that the C ounty refuses to take resposibility for it's rogue bunch of brutal cops.

Now, the same firm that ripped off the County of Orange, the Orange County Sheriff's Department and the cops in the Capizzi case to the tune of more than $100,000 in litigation costs and attorney fees, is refusing to made any good faith settlement offers in the Toy White case. Is this another Capizzi case? Uh, we think so.

Same lead attorney - Al Ballog. Same law firm - Sullivan & Ballog.

I am preparing a California Public Records Act request to various cities and counties to get the exact costs of litigation and attorney fees on a series of cases, like Capizzi and White.

What you will see - because I've obtained the litigation cost bills and attorney fees billed to public entities in the past - is a pattern and practice of out-of-control billing by outside firms that will make you more ill than when you first heard about the $1,500 toilet seat on Airforce I.

Continue reading "WHAT COST TO DEFEND DIRTY COPS? ORANGE COUNTY TAXPAYERS ARE GETTING RIPPED OFF. " »

On July 7, 2007, Laguna Niguel resident Toy White, a beautiful, petite 5'1" blonde was beaten down in her home by a posse of Orange County sheriff deputies. Leading the pack was dogcatcher Harold Holmes. The dirty, ugly facts can be read in depth here. Download file

Today, the City of Mission Viejo settled Mrs. White's claims against City based on the dogcatcher's unlawful actions. Holmes' part in the ruckus was his insistence that Mrs. White relinquish her dog to him for quarantine even though the dog had its rabies shots, and the dog qualified for home quarantine.

Holmes burst into the house to take the dog, and four sheriff deputies burst in behind him, threw Mrs. White to the ground causing her serious injury, handcuffed her, arrested her for resisting arrest and battery on an officer, sent her to jail where she was strip searched, and caused her to be prosecuted.

Once the DA got the full picture, the DA dropped the charges.

But why isn't the County of Orange taking responsibility? Why? It was the cops who beat this tiny cosmetics rep into the ground in her own house. It was the cops who had her wrongfully prosecuted, having trumped up false charges to cover their dirty acts.

And the piece de resistence is that we've all heard about one of the dirty cops. Allan Waters. Ring a bell? Remember the rash of news stories about how a Sheriff's deputy let a raging drunk Waters drive home after a vehicle stop, only to have Walters hit another car head on, sending the elderly occupant to the hospital? Read about it HERE.

Yeah, that's our boy, Allan Waters. In his spare time, when he's not drinking, he's beating up 5'1" blonde cosmetic executives.

Well, he not only beat up little Toy White, he beat up another guy. That guy's name is Robert Isaac. Lo and Behold, Waters busted into Isaacs house, too, causing him injury. And guess what, the County of Orange is defending this cop who is on administrative leave and is pending two really serious civil rights suits.

Attorney Steve Ehrlich from Orange County represents the plaintiff in the Isaac beat down. I represent Mrs. White in the White beat down.

The County of Orange taxpayers are paying two high-priced lawfirms maybe $200 per hour to represent this dirty cop on two separate cases. How many tens of thousands of dollars will the taxpayers be forced to spend on the lawfirm of Sullivan & Ballog, who represents Waters in my case, and the firm of Lawrence, Beach, Allen & Choy in the Isaac beat down case. I guarantee you that by the end of both of these litigations, the County of Orange will have well exceeded $100,000 in attorney fees and litigations costs defending a dirty cop.

It's sickening. The taxayers should stand up and say "We're madder than hell and we're not going to take it any more." They should send the high-priced civil attorneys packing, along with their crummy client. Protect little elderly people from being smashed to smithereens by this drunkard Waters. Protect nice, law abiding cosmetic executives from being attacked in their houses by Waters. Protect whomever from whenever they run into Waters.

In 2008, University of San Diego point guard Trumaine Johnson was at the top of his game. He led the USD Torero's basketball team to the NCAA playoffs under new coach Bill Grier.

But Johnson's tenure at USD was marked with significant instances of racial discrimination. On March 9, 2010, Johnson filed suit against USD, Coach Grier, and the San Diego Police Department (and others) for racial profiing/racial discrimination based on two instances where Johnson was wrongfully accused of crimes. After the second instance, in which Johnson was tacked, kneed in the back, pepper sprayed and arrested for a crime he did not commit and a crime the prosecutors declined to prosecute, he was let go from the Toreros.

For the San Diego City Beat articles, click HERE.

For the San Diego Union Tribune article, click HERE:

The San Diego Police Department and the San Jose Police Department are initiating a pilot program where officers will wear video cameras while on duty. Click HERE for story.

Interesting. The Oceanside PD tried that some years back, as did Laguna. Funny, when defense attorneys started pointing out to the DA's that the videotapes showed a dramatically difference picture than the police reports, cases started getting dismissed.

Oceanside and Laguna finally trashes the cameras. Let's see how long this will last. I suspect that in the first case I get where I ask for the video, I will be told it was on the blink....

PHOENIX (CN) - Two more civil rights complaints against self-proclaimed "America's Toughest Sheriff" Joe Arpaio and his officers cite a "culture of hatred" of Hispanics, and racial profiling. One man claims a Maricopa County deputy ran him over and left him pinned under the police car in front of the man's own home, while assaulting and arresting family members who tried to help him.

The other complaint claims that sheriff's officers in black ski masks beat a Hispanic woman on a "crime sweep" of a business that had a contract with the county, then threw her in jail for two months without allowing her medical assistance for her injured teeth.

In that case, Celia Alvarez says she was jailed for two months without proper medical care after sheriff's made the "crime sweep" on Handyman Maintenance.

In that raid, on Feb. 11, 2009, Alvarez says two deputies "lifted her off her feet, and slammed her face into a wall," injuring her teeth, jaw, face and head.

After Alvarez was interrogated and placed "in a line with many other HMI employees, one of the deputies, completely unprovoked, violently struck" her on the arm with the metal part of a clipboard, she says. She was taken to county jail, where she was subjected to an "invasive and embarrassing strip search" in front of many deputies.

She sought medical attention, but was told that "her first opportunity for medical care would not occur for at least two weeks." She says she was jailed for more than two months without proper medical attention - for so long that "doctors have been unable to repair her condition even through surgery."

Alvarez seeks damages for illegal search and seizure, and assault. She is represented in Federal Court by Steven E. Harrison and N. Patrick Hall with Wallin Harrison of Gilbert, Ariz.
In the other complaint, Armando Nido says he was driving home when Maricopa County Sheriff's Deputy James Carey tried to pull him over for a broken tail light. Carey "illuminated his lights but did not run his siren," says Nido, a U.S. citizen.

Nido says he "slowly and cautiously proceeded to drive his vehicle home rather than immediately pull over" because he feared "the pattern and practice that had been implemented and exhibited by" the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office toward people of Hispanic descent.
Nido says he parked in front of his home and got out to speak to Carey, who "accelerated his own vehicle around the driver's side" of Nido's car, running him over.

Nido says he was trapped under the police car, unable to move, and Carey refused to help him or let his family help him. Nido says he "remained trapped under the vehicle until fire and paramedics arrived," with multiple broken bones and burns, all the while suffering verbal abuse from Carey.

After Carey ran him over, Nido says, his mother ran outside and pleaded to help her son, but Carey "struck her in the chest, knocked her to the ground, handcuffed her and arrested her."

Seeing the abuse, Nido's brother, Raul, began taking photos, and Carey and other deputies "tackled him to the ground, took the camera, handcuffed him, lifted him by his cuffed arms, knocked him to the ground again, re-lifted him by his cuffed arms, and arrested him," according to the complaint.

When a second brother, Rene Nido, sought to help his brother pinned under the car, Carey Tasered him, "handcuffed him, lifted him by his cuffed arms, and arrested him."
All charges filed against the Nidos were dropped, according to the Superior Court complaint. The Nidos say sheriff's detectives recommended that the County Attorney's Office prosecute Carey for aggravated assault, but charges were never filed.

The Nidos say there is a "culture of hatred" in Arpaio's department "to individuals who appear to be of Hispanic descent."

The Nidos seek damages for assault and battery, negligence, false imprisonment and civil rights violations. They are represented by Robert Ramirez with Miranda and Ramirez.

Riverside Police Chief Russell Leach crashed a city-owned vehicle about 3 a.m. Monday, going off the road and hitting a light post and a fire hydrant, authorities said Tuesday.

"Chief Leach was driving on Central Avenue and allowed his car to drift off the road," said California Highway Patrol Inland Division Chief Jeff Talbot. "I understand that two of the tires were down to the rim."

The CHP is investigating the incident, but Talbot said it was too early in the investigation to determine the cause of the accident or whether alcohol was involved.

"As far as any impairment, I have no idea. We will have to rely on statements from the Riverside police officers who were at the scene. There was no arrest," he said. "We will have the vehicle in here tomorrow, and I have some officers going out to the scene."

Riverside's city manager put out a brief statement Tuesday saying Leach had been involved in a single-car, non-injury crash. Leach has been placed on medical leave, the statement said.

Police spokeswoman Sgt. Jaybee Brennan would not comment except to say there had been an accident. She referred all questions to City Atty. Greg Priamos, who did not return calls for comment.

Talbot said Riverside Police Deputy Chief John De La Rosa contacted him Tuesday and asked the CHP to investigate the accident.

"He thought it would be in the best interests of everyone for us to do it," Talbot said. "They wanted us to come in because we are completely unbiased."

The CHP often handles such investigations when they involve other law enforcement agencies.

Leach recently helped lead a massive assault on the notorious East Side Riva gang in Riverside. And last Wednesday he warned against drinking and driving on Super Bowl Sunday.

"Designating a sober driver should be on the top of everyone's Super Bowl party list," he said. "It's just one of several easy steps to help save lives."

Continue reading "CALIFORNIA DUI: CHP TO INVESTIGATE RIVERSIDE POLICE CHIEF'S EARLY MORNING DUI CRASH" »

BRADY DUTY BUT NOT PITCHESS DUTY

The defendant was convicted of murder, and a key witness testified against him. The police detective told the defense that this guy wasn't a paid informant. Some years later, the defense stumbled across information which showed that the guy was in fact a paid informant. The defense now files a habeas petition.

The defense seeks Brady (373 U.S. 83) discovery of complaints in the detective's personnel file that the detective claimed that informants weren't paid when in fact they were.

This is an interesting case because the C/A finds no basis for Pitchess (11 C3d
531) discovery but does order review of the detective's personnel file on Brady grounds, correctly finding that prior complaints about the detective lying about informants being paid would impeach the detective's testimony at any habeas hearing. This is the first possible published case where the court finds a discovery duty under Brady but not
Pitchess.

Eulloqui v. Superior Court; 2010 DJ DAR 1930; DJ, 2/7/10; C/A 2nd,
Div. 1

A Maricopa County Sheriff's detention officer was found in contempt of court Wednesday for his decision to remove a document from a defense attorney's file during a sentencing hearing last month. [To see the full contempt opinion, click Download file]

[This begs the question: why isn't this cop being charged with a crime for stealing a defense attorney's property? This is absolutely outrageous when defense attorneys must bring colleagues to watch their belongings because the cops might steal from them]

The officer was ordered by a judge to hold a press conference to apologize for his actions - an order that Sheriff Joe Arpaio immediately said would be defied.

“My officer was doing his job and I will not stand by and allow him to be thrown to the wolves by the courts because they feel pressure from the media on this situation,” Arpaio said in a press release. He further said, "I decide who holds press conferences and when they are held regarding this Sheriff’s Office.”

Superior Court Judge Gary Donahoe ruled that Officer Adam Stoddard acted in contempt when he pulled two pieces of hand-written paper out of attorney Joanne Cuccia's file on Oct. 19 during a sentencing hearing for Antonio Lozano.

Stoddard testified earlier this month that he saw four words - "going to" "steal" and "money" - in a document sticking out of Cuccia's file that led him to believe Lozano posed some sort of security threat.

The "totality of circumstances" taking place in the court room that day, including the presence of Lozano's associates and Stoddard's belief that Lozano had some history with the Mexican Mafia, all informed his decision, the detention officer testified.

Donahoe disagreed, finding that the presence of those four words on the document didn't pose any immediate security threat and that in removing the privileged communication from Cuccia's file, Stoddard acted unreasonably.

"Even giving DO Stoddard the benefit of the doubt that he had a right to scan the entire paragraph which was in plain sight after seeing the "key words" to determine if Defendant presented an immediate security risk, nothing in that paragraph justified DO Stoddard's continued conduct of removing the document from counsel's file and having the document copied," Donahoe wrote.

Donahoe found that another deputy working in court that day, Francisco Campillo, who made a copy of the documents Stoddard seized, did not act in contempt.

During a hearing last week, Donahoe wrestled with an appropriate punishment for Stoddard if he were to be found in contempt. Cuccia had expressed concerns about the damage to her professional reputation, particularly after Sheriff Joe Arpaio, in a written statement, seemed to excuse Stoddard's actions by linking Cuccia with two attorneys were recently sentenced for or arrested on suspicion of smuggling contraband to inmates.

By Tuesday, Donahoe had determined that Stoddard should hold a news conference outside the Central Court Building by Nov. 30 and offer Cuccia "a sincere verbal and written apology for invading her defense file and for the damage that his conduct may have caused to her professional reputation."

If Stoddard refuses, or Cuccia is not satisfied with the apology, Donahoe ordered Stoddard to report to jail on Dec. 1.

The case became national news after surveillance footage emerged that shows Stoddard move behind Lozano and take a few steps forward before looking down at the defense attorney's table. The footage shows Stoddard pulling out a document sticking out of a file. Stoddard then calls over a Campillo to make copies.

Lozano, 26, was appearing before Judge Lisa Flores to receive his sentence for an aggravated assault he had pleaded guilty to in September, though Stoddard's decision to remove the document calls that into question, too: a public defender said she was going to file a motion to dismiss the case and ask for a change of venue.

PLACING A SHERIFF'S DEPUTY IN A CHAIR NEXT TO A TESTIFYING DEFENDANT

This was an outrage of the week in 2007, and it's an outrage of this week as well. There was no claim that the defefendant had been disruptive or presented any sort of danger.

Nevertheless, the Alameda County Sheriff had a policy that when in-custody defendants testify, a sheriff's deputy pulls up a chair next to the defendant in the witness box, and sits there throughout the defendant's testimony.

Incredibly, the California Supreme Court hold that this wasn't shackling and was just fine, because, get this, it's not inherently prejudicial. And maybe the jurors thought
that the bailiff was there to protect the defendant. From the jurors?

What?

People v. Stevens; 2009 DJ DAR 15705; DJ, 11/6/09; Cal. Supremes

Secret tapes shared with defense lawyers
By Michael BurgeUnion-Tribune Staff Writer
2:00 a.m. October 23, 2009

OCEANSIDE — The District Attorney's Office is sharing with defense attorneys secret recordings of suspects' police interviews so they can weigh whether their clients' cases were compromised.

District Attorney spokesman Paul Levikow said yesterday that prosecutors have identified 37 cases in which Oceanside police Officer Damon Smith recorded interviews with suspects but didn't disclose their existence to prosecutors or defense lawyers.

Levikow said the recordings were made between April 2003 and May 2006, and between November 2008 and May 2009, when they came to light.

“The recordings have been or are being made available to the defense attorneys in those cases,” Levikow said. “They can decide how they can proceed.” He said it was unclear why there was a three-year gap between the recordings.

Bill Trainor, an assistant supervisor for the county Public Defender in North County, said he hadn't heard the tapes were being shared. “Neither (North County branch Supervisor) Larry Beyersdorf nor myself have been notified in either an official or unofficial capacity,” Trainor said. “I'm disquieted by this information.”

Trainor said he recently spoke with Summer Stephan, operations chief for the District Attorney's North County branch, “and she said there's an investigation in the downtown DA's office” into Smith's activities.”

Levikow said he had no comment on whether such an investigation was under way.
Other defense attorneys contacted said they had not yet heard from the district attorney whether cases of theirs were affected.

A spokesman for Oceanside police declined to say whether Smith was disciplined. Sgt. Kelan Poorman said such information is prevented from disclosure by the Peace Officer's Bill of Rights.

Ex-Miami DEA chief indicted in Allen Stanford scandal
By MICHAEL SALLAH AND ROB BARRY

The former chief of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration's Miami office who led the agency's cases against infamous Panama strongman Manuel Noriega and Medellín cartel kingpin Fabio Ochoa was indicted by a federal grand jury Thursday for ordering the shredding of records belonging to disgraced banker Allen Stanford.
Tom Raffanello, who left the DEA five years ago to become Stanford's local security chief, was charged with ordering workers to destroy thousands of documents just days after government agents shut down the banking empire in a massive fraud case.

Prosecutors say the records -- including secret background reports on employees and potential investors -- were hauled away from the company's security bunker in Fort Lauderdale after a federal judge ordered that no company paperwork be destroyed.

In San Diego, we have had a prosecutor who intentionally and wilfully withheld evidence from defense attorneys that one of the San Diego Sheriff's Department crime lab analysts had testified falsely numerous times. Not only did he not tell defense attorneys about this information, he continued to allow his prosecutors to call that lying witness to the stand and let her lie again. Now that prosecutor is a judge. His name is Michael Smyth. Click HERE, for the story. All at tempts to have him respond to the proof of such allegations has been ignored, and the Office of the City Attorney has declined to rectify the wrongs that occurred.

n San Diego, San Bernardino and Riverside, BioTox lab analyst Aaron Layton lied falsified ther esults of tests, lied about conducting confirmatory tests, failed a polygrraph, and now thousands of his cases are being scrutinized. Under a federal g rant, the San Diego Police Department is tasked with investigating problem areas with BioTox and attempting to resolve them. However, the San Diego Police Department has declined to follow this mandatory federal requirement. Click HERE to see article.

Now, a jury has awarded a measly $5 million to a man who spent 17 years in a federal prison after a lab analyst testified falsely in his case. See below for story. It is time the public understands that power corrupts, that prosecutions witnesses lie, and that innocent people are put in prison every day.

JURY AWARDS RODRIGUEZ $5 MILLION

June 25, 2009, 10:03PM

A federal jury on Thursday awarded $5 million to a Houston man who spent 17 years in prison for a kidnapping and rape he did not commit, finding the city should pay for its “deliberate indifference” to problems at the crime lab whose false evidence secured the conviction.

George Rodriguez, 48, gained his freedom in 2004 after DNA tests discredited the findings of the troubled Houston Police Department crime lab on his case. By that time, he had served nearly two decades in prison. His father had died. His daughters faced abuse from men their mother lived with.

“Ain’t no amount of money is going to even my scale,” Rodriguez said after hearing the verdict. “I lost my dad and my girls have been through hell. I am grateful, but no money could replace what I lost.”

A jury of five women and three men deliberated for about two days after hearing testimony from former Mayor Lee P. Brown, who was police chief in 1987, James Bolding, a crime lab manager who testified at Rodriguez’s trial and from Rodriguez himself.

Continue reading "CIVIL RIGHTS LAW: JURY AWARDS $5 MILLION TO MAN WHO SPENT 17 YEARS IN PRISON AFTER CRIME LAB WITNESS TESTIFIED FALSELY" »

A guy walks into a bar in Ramona...By Greg Moran
June 4, 2009, 6:19 p.m.

...and after a few minutes, a dozen different kinds of cross-eyed ugly breaks out. Allegedly.

That's the gist of a rather hair-raising complaint filed in federal court this week by Allen Baker of Ramona and James Playford. They sued the county, the sheriff's department and five deputies for using excessive force, assault and civil rights violations all stemming from an incident at Molly Malone's bar last July. Baker said he had seen deputies at the bar several times a week, fraternizing with women and sometimes handcuffing them and placing them in the back of the squad car. For fun. Apparently. Photos were taken and one of the young women even posted it on her MySpace page, according to the complaint, and captioned it "Bong loads in a cop car."

Well, Baker approached two members of the local constabulary, deputies Colby Hodge and Jeffrey Guthrie, and asked if they were there to pick up girls. They told him to shut up or he would be arrested, which triggered a First Amendment defense kind of response from Baker ("Plaintiff Baker asked Hodge and Guthrie if freedom of speech is illegal" the suit dryly recounts.) Baker says he was put under arrest, there in the bar, and then the suit contends things went from bad to very much worse very quickly.
The suit says he was hit with flashlights, tasered, kicked, beaten and put in a choke hold until he was unconscious. At one point he contends he lost control of his bowels. Taken to jail he was charged with resisting arrest and being drunk in public. But at a preliminary hearing last September Judge Louis Hanoian dismissed one of the resisting charges and reduced a similar charge to a misdemeanor. Eventually Baker pleaded guilty to a single misdemeanor of disturbing the peace.

The incident got pretty good play on local television, partly because of the photos. A video of some of the incident is posted on YouTube. The person who took the video, Playford, contends in the suit that when he showed up at court for a hearing in Baker's case he was harassed by other deputies and was so intimidated he said he would not testify for Baker. The suit alleges a conspiracy among the deputies and faults the county for not investigating the matter.

It's not a pretty picture described by attorney Mary Prevost in the lawsuit, but these police misconduct cases are no walk in the park. There's a way to go here, but there is also lots of intriguing material. We're working on setting up a link to the suit, and are awaiting the response from the county.

Continue reading "SAN DIEGO MAN SUES RAMONA SHERIFF's DEPUTIES FOR BRUTAL ASSAULT AND BATTERY" »

Well, it's another day of misconduct in San Diego.

In December, I filed a federal Civil Rights case against a cop who has had to pay out hefty judgments in the past. Right after I filed a police misconduct motion in a criminal trial, the prosecutor filed a resisting arrest charge against my client just days before the statute of limitations was about to run.

What did they charge? They charged resisting arrest. Problem is, my client is a paraplegic and couldn't resist arrest anayway. It was pure, unadulterated retaliation.

So, what's new? Some woman who wants to divorce her husband gets a bunch of PI's to tail him. Then an SDPD sergeant called one of San Diego's DUI cops to tail the husband. Cop stops husband, and he seems to be fine. He blows a .10, but he has diabetes (and if you know anything about ketosis or acedosis, you know that these compounds in diabetics register like alcohol on these machines, skewing the results). So no charges are filed.

Oh, now wait a minute! That is, until the man who was hunted by the cops on the taxpayer dollar decided to file a claim against the City and sue. Lo and behold, the City Attorney files a DUI charge against the man who the cops hunted, just days after he sends them notice he is going to sue them!

Here it is. Oh, and City Attorney Jonathan Lapin, a misdemeanor prosecutor who will never be more than a misdemeanor prosecutor, scoffs at the medical testimony.

You might remember me posting that Lapin tried to quash a subpeoan of a former prosecutor who had information about a dirty cop I was investigating.

ITS PAYBACK TIME FOR PROSECUTORS WHO BREAK THE LAW. SAN FRANCISCO CITIZENS WILL PAY FOR PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/06/03/BATB17VOV1.DTL

Francisco officials have tentatively agreed to pay $4.5 million to a man who spent nearly 14 years in prison before a judge reversed his murder conviction, finding that city authorities had withheld evidence his attorneys said could have cleared him.

The payout to John "J.J." Tennison, 37, would be the largest settlement ever in San Francisco of a lawsuit related to police conduct, records show. It will go first to the Police Commission and then the Board of Supervisors for approval.

Tennison was freed in 2003 after a federal judge overturned his conviction for the August 1989 killing of 18-year-old Roderick "Cooley" Shannon. He had been serving a prison term of 25 years to life.

Another judge freed Tennison's co-defendant, Antoine Goff, who was serving 27 years to life. A Superior Court judge subsequently declared both men "factually innocent." They then sued in federal court, saying the city had violated their civil rights.

The city attorney's office reached a proposed settlement with Tennison last month, court documents show. Goff's suit is still pending and is scheduled to go to trial later this year.

Although the documents do not give the proposed sum in Tennison's settlement, sources familiar with the matter told The Chronicle that it was $4.5 million. The sources spoke on condition of anonymity because the agreement has not been formally approved.

Elliot Peters, one of Tennison's attorneys, would not discuss the details of any agreement. But he said, "John is going to be compensated for his 14 years in custody - he deserves it."

The city attorney and the lawyer for the two retired police investigators who arrested Tennison when he was 17 have denied that the city or police did anything wrong. Matt Dorsey, spokesman for City Attorney Dennis Herrera, declined to comment on any settlement.

Attorneys for Tennison and Goff have long argued that prosecutors and the two police investigators - Earl Sanders, later the chief of police, and Napoleon Hendrix - kept possibly exculpatory evidence from the defense at the time of trial and afterward.

Tennison's team said the evidence included a post-trial confession of another man and the earlier statement by a woman who indicated that the man may have been involved in Shannon's killing.

The courts found that other evidence the defense says San Francisco authorities never provided - including the existence of a $2,500 reward fund in the case - could have helped Tennison's attorneys challenge the credibility of the only eyewitnesses to the shooting, two girls ages 11 and 14.

Jim Quadra, a private attorney retained by the city to represent Hendrix and Sanders, declined to discuss the settlement but stressed that his clients had acted properly.

"They deny vehemently that they did anything wrong," Quadra said.

Judge found case weak
In freeing Tennison, U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken concluded not only that authorities had withheld key evidence from the defense, but also that the prosecution's case was weak to begin with.

"No physical evidence was presented at trial tying Tennison to Shannon's shooting," she said. "The prosecution's entire case was dependent upon the testimony of ... two young girls whose eyewitness identifications of Tennison were questionable."

Wilken has served as the judge in Tennison's and Goff's lawsuits as well. In the civil case, she rejected some of the same claims that she had cited in releasing Tennison and left only three issues in dispute.

One was the issue of the existence of the "secret" $2,500 reward fund. Defense attorneys said they could have used its existence to challenge witnesses' credibility.

Quadra said police had given a memo mentioning the reward fund to prosecutor George Butterworth, an assertion disputed by Tennison's attorney. "Butterworth did not know about the secret memo," Peters said.

In any event, Quadra said, no money was paid out.

Late confession

The second issue involved the circumstances surrounding the post-trial, taped confession of Lovinsky Ricard. Butterworth admitted the existence of the tape during a hearing on the motion by Tennison's defense for a new trial in May 1991. He said he had just gotten the tape the day before.

Quadra said former inspectors Sanders and Hendrix had never known about the confession, which Ricard made to another investigator, or about the tape's existence. Tennison's attorneys argued that Sanders and Hendrix had known about the tape for seven months but withheld it from prosecutors.

Ricard ultimately asserted his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and refused to answer questions in the civil case.

The third issue concerned the account provided by the woman who had earlier told Sanders and Hendrix that Ricard might have been involved.

Tennison's attorneys said they had not known about the statement by Chante Smith until years after the trial. Butterworth suggested he had not fully understood the account of the interview he got from police, but that he had still given it to the defense.

Wilken ruled that a jury should sort out the dispute.

Continue reading "CALIFORNIA CRIMINAL DEFENSE: SAN FRANCISCO MAY PAY 4.5 MILLION TO WRONGFULLY CONVICTED MAN" »

OCEANSIDE — Some convicts could get new trials because an Oceanside police officer withheld some taped interviews in cases dating to 2001, it was reported Tuesday.

Officer Damon Smith, who disclosed that he had some recordings in his locker that were not entered into evidence as part of a domestic violence case in April, apparently failed to turn over some interviews with suspects and witnesses ever since he was hired eight years ago, the North County Times reported.

"We are gathering information so that we may complete a legal analysis of the issues and take appropriate action," Paul Levikow of the District Attorney's Office told the Times.

In criminal proceedings, all evidence must be made available over to both sides.

"These are highly significant tapes to be left out of the criminal justice process – and eight years is mind-boggling," San Diego County Public Defender Steve Carroll said.

Prosecutors are reviewing the tapes and plan to turn them over to their defense attorneys, who could argue for new trials.

The defense attorney in the domestic violence case said that Smith may have kept the tapes as backup in the event that someone filed a complaint against him. The officer, who was a homicide detective for a while, was involved in the investigation of the shooting death of Oceanside police Officer Dan Bessant, but there was no evidence he failed to turn over recordings in that case.

Still, the tapes prompted a delay in sentencing gang member Meki Gaono in Bessant's 2006 slaying. The sentencing, which had been set for this week, was put off until June 4.

Smith was unavailable for comment on Monday. It was unclear what discipline he might face.

http://jailtimeconsulting.com/blog/tables-turned-on-federal-prosecutors