The Court of Appeals in Beachum v. US decided on December 20, 2018, analyzed and ruled on whether the DC Stalking Statute as written was constitutional. Section 22-3133 (a)(3) in pertinent parts provides that: It is unlawful for a person to purposefully engage in a course of conduct directed at a specific individual . . . [t]hat the person should have known would cause a reasonable person in the individual’s circumstances to: (A) Fear for his or her safety or the safety of another person; (B) Feel seriously alarmed, disturbed, or frightened; or (C) Suffer emotional distress. The appellant argued
Read More
Archives for dc criminal lawyer
NEAR ACT IN DC: RECENT COURT OF APPEALS DECISION: DC ASSAULT LAWYER
The Court of Appeals in Coleman v. U.S. decided on October 11, 2018, affirmed simple assault convictions against the police officers as well as affirming the trial’s court denial of the self-defense claim. Coleman was questioned by the police officers during a routine traffic stop regarding his tinted car windows. The stop escalated and Coleman both resisted arrest, and assaulted the police officers. He was charged with APO, Assault on Police Officer. The government at trial dropped the Assault on Police Officers (APO) charges to Simple Assault to eliminate the jury demandable offense to non-jury bench trial, which they typically
Read More
PUBLIC CONSUMPTION OF MARIJUANA NON-CUSTODIAL: NEW DIRECTIVE FROM THE MAYOR: DC CRIMINAL LAWYER
The current DC Statute on consumption of marijuana in public is clear and concise categorizing the act as a misdemeanor offense with significant penalties. However if appears that the Major’s directive issued on September 21, 2018, limits the penalties to a non-custodial arrest and payment of $25 fine for posting and forfeiting. The Statute specifically criminalizes consumption of marijuana in or upon a public space including: A street, alley, park, sidewalk, or parking area; A vehicle in or upon any street, alley, park, or parking area; or Any place to which the public is invited. For the purposes of this subsection,
Read More
DRIVING WHILE INTOXICATED (E-SCOOTER): ARREST-ABLE? VERY MUCH SO … DC DUI LAWYER
The Personal Mobility Devices are becoming prevalent and turning into a significant commuting and recreational use device/vehicles. There is the BYRD electric scooter, LIME, SKIP, etc. The legal issue is whether these devices are categorized as vehicles subject to the DUI/DWI Statute and enforcement or there is an exception. The short answer: they are categorized as vehicles subject to DUI/DWI arrest but not a motor vehicle subject to chemical testing submission. The DC Driving Under the Influence Statute provides that: No person shall operate or be in physical control of any vehicle in the District While the person is intoxicated;
Read More
MARIJUANA BREATHALYZER DEVICES: DC DUI LAWYER
The current DC DUI laws although provide details regarding alcohol consumption and corresponding penalties associated with BAC (Blood Alcohol Content) — are silent on marijuana use, level thereof, and driving a motor vehicle while under influence of marijuana. The DUI Statute clearly penalizes and provides minimum sentence for schedule I drugs: Specifically the Statute provides: A 15-day mandatory-minimum term of incarceration shall be imposed if the person’s blood or urine contains a Schedule I chemical or controlled substance as listed in § 48-902.04, Phencyclidine, Cocaine, Methadone, Morphine, or one of its active metabolites or analogs. However there is no mention of
Read More
REVERSAL DUE TO ERRONEOUS JURY INSTRUCTIONS: DC CRIMINAL LAWYER
The Court of Appeals in Dawkins v. U.S., decide on July 26, 2018, reversed a manslaughter conviction based on erroneous and incomplete jury instructions on technicalities of the self-defense law and its application. An effective employment of self-defense can negate or diffuse the malice of an intentional act. That is, even an intentional killing based on a valid self-defense is not malicious and thus it is excused and accordingly no crime at all. Here the defendant was in a fistfight with the victim and as the fight escalated, the defendant fatally stabbed the victim as claimed in the self-defense. The
Read More
JURY DEMANDABLE WHEN DEPORTATION CONSEQUENCES:
The DC Court of Appeals in Jean-Baptiste Bado v. U.S., decided on June 21, 2018, reversed the appellant’s conviction for misdemeanor sexual abuse of a minor and after a bench trial, on the ground that he was denied the right to a jury trial guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment. The question before the Court was whether the Sixth Amendment guarantees a right to a jury trial to an accused who faces the penalty of removal/deportation when the underlying maximum penalty for the crime was only 180 days of incarceration and not by itself jury demandable. The Sixth Amendment guarantees a
Read More
US SUPREME COURT SIDING WITH THE PRIVACY RIGHTS:
The US Supreme Court in a significant privacy rights case in Carpenter v. U.S., decided on June 22, 2018, reversed a the lower court decisions allowing for Cell Site Location Information (“CSLI”) to be used to obtain a conviction without a proper application of warrant. Carpenter was convicted of armed robbery and weapons’ charges as the investigators were able to map his whereabouts for a 27 days period with 107 data points or location tracker per day through the CSLI data collected by his cell phone carrier. The government had only to show a “reasonable grounds” for believing that the
Read More
DC Marijuana POP-UP Events — Legal? DC CRIMINAL LAWYER
In the midst of another major arrests at the pop-up marijuana event this past Saturday (June 17, 2018) in the NE DC where about thirty vendors were arrests, the legality of these events certainly has been put to the test. The vendors and the event coordinators have pushed the limits of law and in effect have forced the narcotic task force to intervene and make arrests. In the Saturday’s events three weapons were also seized which will heighten the DC police scrutiny of these events. At the heart of promulgation of these events is the DC decriminalization Statute that for
Read More
BREATHALYZER DEVICE: CHALLENGING RESULTS IN COURT: DC DUI LAWYER
The most prevalent form of measuring intoxication by the law enforcement is the breathalyzer. The device is designed to measure the levels of alcohol in the lungs and not in the breath. Thus a sip of alcohol and testing right after would not and should not register any measurable levels of alcohol. Alcohol consumed however gets processed in the body. It gets absorbed from the mouth through throat and stomach and distributes into the bloodstream. Alcohol is not digested upon absorption and remains chemically the same in the bloodstream. As the alcohol infused blood travels through the lunge membranes it contaminates
Read More