Mediaboss Marketing

I must confess that when I hear someone say that a legal case was decided on a technicality, my blood pressure goes up. I understand that it often appears at first glance that a nitpicking rule, or procedure, should not affect the outcome when a decision on the merits of the matter seems preferable and more just.

But a quick look at history indeed, a quick look at the history of the present moment around the world reveals that procedural justice is not a nuisance invented by lawyers and ivory tower academics. The truth is that procedural justice is at the very heart of the rule of law and thus is essential to freedom, fairness, and democracy.

No system of justice can operate properly if the rules of the game are not fair and do not apply equally to everyone, regardless of their political orientation or views of myriad subjects.

The bad guys deserve precisely the same level of protection as the good guys. The whole point of the rule of law is that everyone is operating pursuant to the same rules, rules which are fair, logical, and known to all participants. The unbiased application of legal norms and rulesrules of procedure, rules of evidence, rules relating to the suppression of illegally seized evidence, and many othersis essential to ensure fair outcomes. Our country has always prided itself on the principal that all who enter the legal system will begin at the same starting line.

Let me take a common hypothetical example of how the importance of legal technicalities can be misunderstood.

Police arrest an individual, lets call him Mr. Drugdealer, and charge him with a crime. The principal evidence of guilt is a bag of cocaine seized from the defendants residence. The defense files a motion seeking to prevent the use of the drugs at trial on the grounds that they were illegally seized in violation of the United States Constitution.

Following a hearing, a judge agrees with the defendants argument, suppresses the use of the cocaine by the state, and the state, lacking evidence, dismisses the case. The local newspaper predictably editorializes that it is travesty that Mr. Drugdealer walked away unscathed in the face of obvious guilt due to a legal technicality, and that the judge should be removed from the bench. After all, isnt it 100 percent clear that the defendant is guilty?

In this case, the legal technicality was the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which states in part: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated

Rather than lament the outcome, I believe it should be celebrated as a sign that the restrictions placed on the state by the Constitution are being honored and fairly applied.

What the newspaper failed to appreciate in this case is that while prosecuting criminals is a very important goal of society, it is not the only very important value at stake. The opposing value, expressed in the United States Constitution and state constitutions as well, is ensuring the privacy of people and the sanctity of their residence, and place limits on the police authorities. I remember a former law professor of mine who once stated that what some people called legal technicalities should really be viewed as tiny constitutions, designed to protect the rights of everyone, no matter their status in society.

The Founding Fathers, veterans of the Revolutionary War, understood what it meant to live in a society in which state power is unrestrained. They had lived under British rule, enduring taxation without representation, being forced to quarter troops in their homes, and various other indignities. The Constitution they drafted is largely premised on the proposition that a healthy dose of distrust of government power is a good and necessary thing.

So it is no accident that one of the first things totalitarian leaders do is change the technical rules to their own advantage, or abolish laws and procedures that stand in their way. The new rules they create may give an outward appearance of fairness, but they are a fraud. They are designed to strip the opposition of its rights and to ensure that enemies of the state are crushed.

The next time you hear someone complain about a legal technicality, please hesitate before you assume that the system has malfunctioned. Consider the possibility that the legal technicality should not be viewed as a nuisance, but as an essential ingredient in ensuring fair play, equal justice, and protection of the rule of law.

Without legal technicalities, democracy cannot exist. Without legal technicalities, and people who understand the essential role they play, our glorious experiment in freedom will be in mortal danger.

Link:
Opinion: Democracy can't exist without "legal technicalities" - The Connecticut Mirror

California Highway Patrol vehicle at the State Capitol June, 2021.(Photo by Robert J Hansen)

By Robert J. Hansen

California is moving a bill through the legislature that would prohibit police from initiating low-level traffic stops unless there is a separate, independent reason.

A policy that I began suggesting two years ago.

Traffic stops are the most common interaction between police and civilians and are a primary source of racial and economic injustice according to Jordan Blair Woods, a law professor at the University of Arkansas.

Traffic enforcement is thus a common gateway for funneling over-policed and marginalized communities into the criminal justice system, Woods said in 2021.

SB 50 would limit law enforcements ability to use minor, non-safety-related traffic infractions to conduct what are often racially-biased, pretextual stops. It will also provide technical clarification to ensure that cities and counties in California have sufficient flexibility to explore non-law enforcement approaches to traffic safety.

About 3 percent of traffic stops result in an arrest according to a 2021 Center for Policing Equity (CPE) study.

A safety-first approach to traffic enforcement would also remediate racial disparities and reduce interactions between civilians and law enforcement.

Research shows that pretext stops do not significantly benefit public safety, yet use valuable resources that could be directed to more effective public safety approaches.

A 2022 study by Catalyst California and ACLU SoCal found that instead of addressing community concerns about serious crime, sheriffs deputies in Los Angeles and Riverside counties spent nearly 9 out of every 10 hours on stops initiated by officers rather than responding to calls for help.

Not surprisingly, the only opposition to the policy is from almost every law enforcement agency, union and district attorney in California. If SB 50 does not become law, it will be because the law enforcement community refuses to adopt the reforms lawmakers are creating.

Most importantly, this bills prohibition on detaining drivers for low-level infractions deprives peace officers of a very effective investigative tool that is often used by law enforcement to gather information needed in an ongoing criminal investigation, apprehend a suspect who is wanted for having committed an unrelated criminal violation or to investigate an unrelated offense, according to the California District Attorneys Association (CDAA).

The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution provides in part that, in When v. United States (1996), the Supreme Court held that the temporary detention of a motorist upon probable cause to believe that he has violated the traffic laws does not violate the Fourth Amendments protection from unreasonable seizures.

The When decision led to the widespread use of pretext stops, a traffic stop made as a pretext to stop a vehicle to investigate other possible crimes.

Many argue that pretext stops are a driver of racial bias in law enforcement, with others asserting that they subvert the spirit of the Fourth Amendment by giving officers carte blanche to stop a vehicle.

The CDAA wants to continue violating Californians constitutional rights to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.

We have seen far too many times how traffic stops can rapidly escalate and turn deadly, Senator Steven Bradford said. In this day and age, theres no reason why Californians should be stopped and potentially subjected to brutality or dehumanizing because of an expired license plate.

This legislation will reduce the potential for more harm to innocent members of the public, according to Bradford.

SB 50 will especially help to protect Californians of color from unnecessary harm and ensure that law enforcement has more time to focus on community safety by preventing and solving serious crimes, said Bradford. The data backs up the need for this legislation. Black Californians are far more likely to be targeted by police.

This legislation will also help to reduce the risk of harm to law enforcement officers by limiting the need for one of the most dangerous elements of their job, according to the bill.

By opposing the bill, the law enforcement community is effectively saying that it has no interest in focusing on more dangerous crimes or reducing the harm it causes minorities and disadvantaged communities. It even wants to keep a policy that makes the job more dangerous.

Berkeley policy analyst Darrell Owens thinks police dedicating their time to traffic enforcement is a waste of time and resources.

Owens spearheaded a proposal that would allow Berkeley to have unarmed officers enforce violations.

I agree with decriminalizing low-level traffic violations, Owens said.

Police departments try to avoid looking like they are racial profiling by making non-suspicious, low-level traffic stops according to Owens.

Then make a suspicious vehicle stop, Owens said. Just be honest about it. If you think that person is running guns in the community then thats what you stop them for. We dont need you [law enforcement] to muddle up traffic safety with policing.

It also doesnt work according to Owens.

People genuinely think that police are there to keep the roads safer with traffic violations. No, theyre not. Theyre there to do warrantless policing.

Recent Reforms

Oakland instituted a policy in 2018 of no longer initiating low-level traffic stops.

The number of traffic stops involving Black individuals decreased by over eight thousand, representing a 43% drop, according to the bill.

Berkeley proposed creating a Berkeley Department of Transportation which would take over responsibility for traffic enforcement from the police department.

In March 2022, the Los Angeles Police Department implemented a policy to limit the use, duration and scope of pretext stops conducted by its officers. The policy allows officers to make stops for minor equipment violations or other infractions only when the officer believes that such a violation significantly interferes with public safety but requires officers to state the public safety reason for such stops on their body-worn cameras.

Philadelphia became the first major city in the U.S. to ban low-level traffic stops in 2021.

Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey announced last August that the city attorneys office will no longer pursue tickets against motorists except for egregious driving behavior or criminal activity.

Former Rochester police officer and author of Police Brutality Matters, Joseph Ested thinks traffic stops should only be made for reasons related to dangerous driving but its a lack of accountability that allows traffic stops to be misused.

Routine traffic stops based on minor violations, pretextual stops and stops made for reasonable suspicion should be prohibited, Ested said in 2021.

A narrowly defined set of violations, violent felony warrants and crime in progress should be permitted, according to Ested.

Unimpeded Mobility Increases Americas Economic Upward Mobility

American mobility has been impeded and restricted since the Supreme Courts ruling in Carroll v. United States (1925), which essentially stripped Americans of their Fourth Amendment rights.

The right to drive and the car gave Black Americans the ability to leave the south, women a chance to leave their homes and husbands and immigrants to find work anywhere throughout this county.

Carroll v. United States established and set a precedent for the subsequent rulings despite repealing Prohibition in 1933 and fueled mass incarceration in the United States.

Its not a coincidence that women, Black people, immigrants and poor people are the same groups still fighting for equal treatment.

Americas labor force is roughly 63 percent of its total population which is about 160 million people, according to Census data. Almost 120 million drive alone to work every day, with another 14 million carpooling.

Public transportation will not provide the utility to double that five percent, let alone offer transportation for half the country anytime soon.

If there were any way to be more efficient than private vehicles, American ingenuity would have figured it out. It has not, thus far.

The American highway system was the successor to the transcontinental railroad and the countrys primary mode of personal travel. It has provided personal mobility to every citizen and is responsible for creating the most productive economy in the world for over 120 years.

Now what happens when you cant afford to pay a low-level traffic ticket? Most places in the U.S. will pile on additional fees and interest charges, suspend your drivers license or even issue a bench warrant for your arrest, over a traffic stop.

Fees are a hidden, regressive tax that harshly punish hard-working families living paycheck to paycheck, according to the ACLU.

This is just one of the ways that fees in the justice system trap far too many people in a vicious cycle of debt and punishment.

Fines are devastating to families and entire communities and are disproportionately assessed against minorities and disadvantaged communities.

This system of traffic fines takes money directly out of the pockets of families who are least able to afford them, locking many individuals in a cycle of economic instability.

Improving American economic stability, reducing racial tensions and disparities, saving the lives of drivers and police officers and honoring constitutional protections are all being opposed by Californias law enforcement officials and district attorneys as long as they oppose SB 50 becoming law.

Continued here:
Commentary: Police and District Attorneys Dont Want to Give Up ... - The Peoples Vanguard of Davis

From staff reports

Already on probation in Smyth County, a Rural Retreat man is facing new felonies after the Wythe County Sheriffs Office investigated thefts from a Cedar Springs Road residence.

Robert Adam Gore, 30, was arrested on April 1 and charged with being a felon in possession of a firearm, stealing a firearm, possessing burglary tools, grand larceny and trespassing.

According to a search warrant and arrest warrants, Gore is accused of taking a gun, tools and various household items from the residence on March 25 and March 30.

First Sgt. J.M. Blevins said deputies were dispatched to 5895 Cedar Springs Road for suspicious activity on March 30 when they detained Gore and another man, 37-year-old Allen Edward Tirado of Marion, who was charged with trespassing. A third person ran away, police said.

Officers had already taken a larceny report from the residence earlier in the month, and the victims had put out two trail cameras, one of which was stolen.

People are also reading

The remaining camera, though, showed suspects entering the residence and pulling into the driveway in a dark pickup. Deputies found a black Ford pickup in the driveway on March 30, Blevins wrote.

In plain view sight in the passenger side of the vehicle was a green in color piggy bank which the victim stated was taken from inside the residence, Blevins wrote. The Ford F-150 matched the description of the vehicle which was on the trail camera the evening before.

Blevins said Gore admitted to removing items from the residence and taking them to his Rural Retreat residence.

Officers seized more than 100 items when they searched Gores Main Street property on March 30. The items included tools, jewelry boxes, lightbulbs, binoculars, ammunition, toilet paper, a tackle box and more, according to a search warrant.

Unemployed, Gore, who has a court-appointed attorney, is being held on a $5,000 bond.

His preliminary hearing has been set for May 11.

According to court records, Gore was convicted of drug distribution in Smyth County last September. He was sentenced to jail time and placed on probation for two years. His criminal record also includes charges of petit larceny, assault, drug possession and trespassing, according to court documents.

Former hotel manager convicted

A one-time general manager of Wythevilles Bolling Wilson Hotel pleaded guilty to credit card theft and forgery on Thursday.

As part of a plea agreement, 39-year-old Jessica Jean Dunsmore of Rural Retreat got a five-year suspended sentence and was ordered to repay William Smith $919.36.

She was also ordered to stay out of trouble for a year, during which time shes waiving her Fourth Amendment protections.

The commonwealth dropped five additional charges of credit card forgery.

According to an earlier search warrant, Wytheville police investigated Dunsmore related to 2021 fraudulent charges made on a credit card belonging to GW Hotel Tenant LLC and issued to Dunsmore. Smith is listed as the companys registered agent.

Police collected Appalachian Power records as part of the investigation.

Get local news delivered to your inbox!

See the rest here:
POLICE AND COURT BRIEFS: Rural Retreat man facing charges in ... - Southwest Virginia Today

Llano County has filed a no tice of appeal to federal Judge Robert Pitmans order last week that books removed from county library shelves be replaced, a lawyer for plaintiffs in the lawsuit said Monday.

Katherine Chiarello of Witliff/ Cutter PLLC in Austin said the books have been returned to the shelves. Pitman issued the temporary order Thursday, calling for librarians to replace books that county commissioners ordered removed.

The removal came last year after some library patrons charged some childrens books were inappropriate. Titles included I Need a New Butt! written by Dawn McMillan (illustrated by Ross Kinnaird) and Freddy the Farting Snowman, written and illustrated by Jane Bexley.

Other patrons sued in federal court, claiming that the removal violated first and fourth amendment rights of free speech and freedom from unlawful seizure.

The appeal will go to the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, based in New Orleans. However, the appeal could be heard after the actual trial date.

She said the temporary injunction was based on Pitmans belief that plaintiffs had shown a reasonable expectation of winning the case.

The evidence that we put in front of the judge was a two-day evidentiary hearing, she said. Based on the evidence we presented, he thought we had shown a likelihood of success. But we still need to win at trial.

If the plaintiffs succeed at the trial, Pitman will presumably issue a permanent injunction ordering the county to keep the books on the shelves.

Neither Jonathan Mitchell of Austin, attorney of record for the defendants, nor County Attorney Dwain Rogers immediately returned phone calls seeking comment.

Plaintiffs in the suit include Leila Green Little, Jeanne Puryear, Kathy Kennedy, Rebecca Jones, Richard Day, Cynthia Waring and Diane Moster.

Defendants in the suit are Llano County Judge Ron Cunningham, Llano County commissioners Peter Jones, Linda Raschke, Mike Sandoval and Jerry Don Moss, Llano County Library System Director Amber Milum and Advisory Board members Bonnie Wallace, Rochelle Wells, Rhonda Schneider and Gay Gaskin, president of the board.

Originally filed in federal court in San Antonio, the case was moved to Pitmans Austin court because he has jurisdiction over Llano County.

Continue reading here:
Llano Co. to appeal order to return books - The Highlander

Buena Park could become the second Orange County city to enact rent control following a recent vocal push by renters and activists in the city and beyond.

Ive witnessed first hand the financial struggles many of my clients face, said Jenny Seon, an attorney with the Buena Park-based community group, Ahri.

These individuals are barely making ends meet and many of them are on the verge of eviction and homelessness, Seon told Buena Park City Council members during last Tuesdays meeting.

If Buena Park does adopt rent control, itll be the second city in OC to do so.

Roughly 10 miles south on the 5 freeway, Santa Anas wrestling with a lawsuit from the Apartment Association of Orange County, which says the rent control law is preventing landowners from getting a fair return on their property investments.

[Read: OC Landlord Group Moves to Sue Santa Ana to Overturn Rent Control]

The face of the Ordinance makes it apparent that the effect of the Ordinances rent control provisions will necessarily be to lower rents more than reasonably required for the Ordinances legitimate purposes, if any exist, and are thus constitutionally confiscatory, reads the Associations lawsuit.

Scores of residents activists told city officials during Tuesdays public comment that rents are becoming increasingly unaffordable while living conditions are deteriorating.

In their own public comments from the dais, Buena Park City Council members all seemingly agreed that rent regulations are needed in a city home to roughly 83,000 people with an average rent of $1,800 a month.

While they all expressed support for rent control, council members said they need to see specific examples and data.

I want more information. I would like for you to bring back more that we can work with, but I think we need to do something to assist with rental stabilization so we dont increase homelessness in this city and people have a sense of security that the roof they have over their heads is not going to be ripped from them for spurious reasons, said Councilwoman Susan Sonne at last Tuesdays council meeting.

It mirrors efforts by activists and renters in Santa Ana, Orange Countys first city to enact a rent control law in 2021.

[Read: Santa Ana Becomes First Orange County City With Rent Control]

Buena Parks rent control discussion also brought out some Santa Ana activists part of the same people who successfully pushed for the rent caps in their city.

Im from Santa Ana where we became the first city in Orange County to enact a rent protection ordinance Ive seen first hand through my neighbors and friends how rent control allowed them to stay in their neighborhoods, said Bulmaro Vicente, an organizer with the Santa Ana-based activist group, Chispa, who ran unsuccessfully for state assembly last year.

Last Tuesdays council meeting in Buena Park marked another chapter of local community organizations, activist groups and residents from different cities coming together to push elected officials to address quality of life concerns.

[Read: COVID Forged a New Generation of Community Activism Across OC]

While the City of Santa Ana is being sued by the Apartment Association of Orange County over the law, residents in other parts of OC are also calling on their elected officials to consider rent control like residents and community health workers in Costa Mesa.

[Read: After Santa Ana, Rent Control Murmurs Get Louder in One Coastal Orange County City]

Buena City Councilman Jose Trinidad Castaeda, who brought the proposal forward, said hes looking to make rent control stricter than state law although specifics are still being ironed out.

Hopefully a 3% maximum allowable increase, Castaeda said at Tuesdays meeting.

State rent control law caps rent increases at 5% plus the increase in cost of living or 10% annually whichever of the two is lower.

As Buena Park city staff construct the proposal, Castaeda said landlords, property owners and related interest groups need to be included in the discussions.

I dont want them to feel vilified, he said.

Castaeda also floated the idea of city officials monitoring reasons for rent bumps beyond cost of living increases.

He told staff to bring back proposals with options on how to enforce if landlords dont provide justifications on the rent increases on why theyre increasing rent beyond [the consumer price index]. Otherwise were allowing greed to run amuck.

Recently, residents have been alleging subpar living conditions and retaliation by some landlords for filing maintenance complaints with city code enforcement officers something Castaeda has echoed from the dais.

Earlier this month, Buena Park City Council members moved forward with a measure to hold landlords accountable for repairs by having code enforcement staff conduct routine inspections of apartments.

[Read: Buena Park Officials Consider Holding Landlords Accountable for Apartment Repairs]

We want to be able to incentivize folks who are living in bad conditions to seek better conditions without fear of being evicted, Councilman Connor Traut said at last Tuesdays meeting.

Buena Park is also looking to create a rental registration board a focal point in the Apartment Associations lawsuit against Santa Ana.

Yet that seemingly didnt deter Buena Park City Council members.

Im curious why the lawsuit on rental registration isnt renting properties a form of a business and can we not require that businesses do some sort of self identification? Sonne asked City Attorney Christopher Cardinale.

Cardinale responded that cities have, for the most part, been successful in rent control lawsuits.

But he said the Associations focus on Santa Anas rental board is a new argument its basically a Fourth Amendment illegal search and seizure right theyre arguing.

Council members also said the push for rent control also shouldnt discourage new housing construction in Buena Park and city staff said making the law apply to rentals older than 15 years shouldnt limit new homes.

Obviously we are short of housing and while we need to protect our citizens that are renting, we also need to make sure theres going to be incentive or some sort of rights for new developers to develop housing, Councilwoman Joyce Ahn said.

Traut said officials need to make sure they dont put something in place thats going to disincentivize construction in our city.

Responding to Trauts concerns, Cardinale said property owners need to have a fair return on their investment.

Mayor Art Brown put it simply last Tuesday:

I support everything thats been said tonight.

Spencer Custodio is the civic editor. You can reach him at scustodio@voiceofoc.org. Follow him on Twitter @SpencerCustodio.

Start each day informed with our free email newsletter.

You are obviously connected to your community and value good journalism. As an independent and local nonprofit, our news is accessible to all, regardless of what they can afford. Our newsroom centers on Orange Countys civic and cultural life, with no paywalls and no popups. Our reporters hold powerful interests accountable to protect your quality of life. But this work not free. It depends on donors like you.

Related

See the article here:
Rent Control Could Come to Buena Park - Voice of OC