Posts Tagged ‘Constitutional Rights’

Utah Principal Admits to Viewing Pornography at School

Utah Criminal Defense Blog, on the topic of  Constitutional Rights
Comments Offcomment

A Utah principal is in legal hot water after he admitted to viewing pornography on his phone in his elementary school office.

Photo: The GameWay

Photo: The GameWay

What Happened?

Chad Christman reportedly told a school district police detective that he had accessed a pornographic website while in his school office in February. The Utah principal has been charged with a class A misdemeanor; he resigned his position two weeks ago.

Invoke Your Constitutional Right

One of Christman’s biggest mistakes, besides viewing porn at work, was discussing his case with police without the advice of a Utah criminal defense attorney. Keep in mind that you are under no obligation—and, in fact, it can be to your detriment—to talk to law enforcement about any criminal matter they believe you’re involved in.

Don’t be afraid to use your Constitutional right to remain silent when approached by police. They will likely try hard to get you to talk, but you don’t need to admit anything without consulting an attorney.

Viewing indecent material or pornography while on school property is, as we mentioned, a class A misdemeanor if you’re 18 or older. It’s a class B misdemeanor if you’re under the age of 18. Additionally, each incident of viewing porn can be charged separately; if you access a porno website three separate times, you will likely be charged with three misdemeanors.

Ask a Utah Criminal Defense Attorney for Advice

Contact a Utah criminal defense attorney if you’re facing any criminal charges, or even if you’re being investigated by law enforcement. You don’t have to wait to be arrested to benefit from top legal representation. Make the right call today.

State v. Lamb: Utah Court of Appeals Considers Cattle Rustling Case

The Utah Court of Appeals issued an opinion this week upholding the convictions of Jeff Lamb for three counts of theft of lost property, third degree felonies under Utah Code section 76-6-407. State v. Lamb, 2013 UT App 5, Case No. 20111071-CA.

In 2010, Utah Department of Agriculture Theft Inspectors received a tip of possible cattle rustling in Ephraim, Utah and went to a nearby property to investigate. Using binoculars, the inspectors looked at the cattle on Mr. Lamb’s property and found that one of the calves did not have the Lamb branding marks. Based on this observation, the inspectors entered the first and found two other cows with different ownership markings.

Mr. Lamb challenged his convictions, arguing that the three charges should have been tried in separate trials because the charges involved different owners, different kinds of cattle, and different days when Mr. Lamb obtained them. The trial court disagreed and found that the thefts were part of a common plan or scheme because they were all obtained when Mr. Lamb was driving his herd was between ranges and they were all kept in possession for a long time “without taking reasonable measures to return them.” The court of appeals agreed with the trial court.

Mr. Lamb also argued that the inspectors viewing of his field and entry onto field violated his right against unreasonable search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution. The court of appeals disagreed with Mr. Lamb and cited the United States Supreme Court cases that have found that “open fields” are not protected by the Fourth Amendment. According to the court, “An ‘open field’ need not actually even be ‘open’ or a ‘field.’ So long as it is not part of the curtilage of a home, an ‘open field’ can be a secluded field surrounded by woods, fences, chicken wire, or embankments, and entirely out of public view or access; it can even be a cave, a still, a shed, a small concrete building, a chicken coop, a hog pen, a good pen, or an open and shared parking area adjacent to or behind an apartment building.” Lamb, 2013 UT App 5, ¶ 16.

Even though you may own a piece of property, it does not mean that there is absolute right to keep the police from entering onto it. Courts looks to whether the owner has a “reasonable expectation of privacy” in the property when considering search challenge.

If you are under investigation or have been arrested, call an experienced criminal defense attorney to help you learn about and protect your rights.

Utah Man Acquitted of Murder Charge

Utah Criminal Defense Blog, on the topic of  Utah Court
0comment

When Roberto Roman entered the courtroom last Friday, it was to find out if he was going to spend life in prison for the shooting death of a Millard County Sheriff’s deputy. The jury, however, acquitted Roman of Josie Fox’s murder after deliberating for eight hours.

Photo: Penn State Law

Roman Previously Admitted Committing Murder

The jurors did not find the state’s evidence compelling enough to overcome the reasonable doubt that Roman had committed the murder. Roman, who the judge declared is mentally retarded, initially admitted guilt in killing Fox. During the trial, he changed his testimony, stating that it was actually Fox’s brother who had killed her and then threatened Roman if he didn’t take the blame.

The prosecution was disappointed in the verdict, of course, noting that it was easy to blame Fox’s brother since he is deceased and couldn’t speak for himself.

Innocent Until Proven Guilty

When you think of the story from Roman’s point-of-view, though, his version of the events doesn’t seem unbelievable. It’s entirely likely that if a man shoots and kills his sister, he wouldn’t hesitate to see a mentally retarded person take the blame. Remember that just because a person is arrested for a crime, it doesn’t automatically mean he’s guilty. The burden is still on the prosecution to prove—beyond a reasonable doubt—that the defendant is the most likely person to have committed the crime.

Even though no one wants to think one person could murder his sibling, it wouldn’t be the first time it’s happened. People can do unexpected things when faced with a tough situation.

Let a Utah Criminal Defense Attorney Help You

If you’re in a legal bind, you need the services of a top Utah criminal defense attorney. You don’t have to be facing a murder charge to benefit from legal help. Don’t talk to the police or the prosecution. Hire an attorney who will communicate with law enforcement on your behalf and put his knowledge of criminal law to work for you.

Ogden, Utah Contemplates Ban on Swearing in Public Parks

Utah Criminal Lawyer, on the topic of  Constitutional Rights, Crimes, Question, Utah Crime News
0comment

If you haven’t already heard, visitors to Ogden, Utah’s public parks may be hearing and saying a lot less. Ogden City has proposed a ban on swearing in public parks if the profanity has potential to “breach the peace.” See Profanity Penalty, Deseret News. The proposal requires that the offender be given a warning for a first offense but subsequent offenses may be cited as infractions or class C misdemeanors. Conviction for a class C misdemeanor may result in 90 days in jail and/or a $750 fine. Utah Code §§ 76-3-204; 76-3-301.What remains to be seen is how law officials will interpret what uses of profanity have potential to “breach the peace.”

Ogden is certainly not the first or the last city to attempt to ban profanity in public places. Recently, a town in Massachusetts voted to fine individuals $20 for swearing in public. See “Massachusetts Town OKs $20 Fine” USA Today.

The United States Supreme Court has a long line of cases addressing cities and states that penalize speech in public places. For example, in 1942, the Supreme Court found that it was okay for laws to ban “the use in a public place of words likely to cause a breach of the peace” such as words likely to cause violence. Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568, 573-74 (1942). But a state’s power to prohibit speech in public places is not without limitation. In 1971, the Supreme Court found that arresting and convicting a man for wearing of a jacket that said “**** the Draft” in a courthouse was unconstitutional. Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971). Justice Harlan wrote “while the particular four-letter word being litigated here is perhaps more distasteful than most others of its genre, it is nevertheless often true that one man’s vulgarity is another’s lyric.” The Supreme Court refused to accept the idea that states can “forbid particular words without also running a substantial risk of suppressing ideas in the process.”

This raises some concerns as to whether an ordinance like the one proposed in Ogden or adopted in Massachusetts are constitutional under the First Amendment.

So what do you think readers? Should swearing in public be a criminal offense?

Is Utah’s Bigamy Law Unconstitutional?

Utah Criminal Defense Blog, on the topic of  Constitutional Rights, Criminal Defense Misc
0comment

Let’s start off by stating that we’re not going to prove whether or not Utah’s bigamy law is unconstitutional in this blog. Utah’s bigamy law has been in question for many, many years, and the answer is clear-cut for some while a little mixed for others.

What is Utah’s Bigamy Law?

The Utah Code states that a person is guilty of bigamy when, knowing he has a husband or wife or knowing the other person has a husband or wife, the person purports to marry another person or cohabits with another person. Bigamy is a third-degree felony.

The Brown Family

There is currently a constitutional case involving the Brown family from Utah County and Utah’s bigamy law. The family’s claim to fame involves being on the television show “Sister Wives.” Before the show aired in 2010, Mark Shurtleff, the current Utah Attorney General, assured the family that they would not be opening themselves up to potential prosecution by the State of Utah. Shurtleff’s position is that he will not prosecute consenting adult polygamists as long as they aren’t involved in other criminal activities.

A federal judge recently removed Utah’s governor and attorney general from the case, but is allowing the lawsuit against Utah County prosecutors to move forward.

The Brown family’s case is considered by some to be very different from another well-known case involving Warren Jeffs. In the Jeffs’ case, he was alleged to have married under-age girls in polygamist situations.

Your Opinion Matters

We like to promote opinions on this blog, particularly as everyone is entitled to his or her own feelings about any given situation. We also like to remind people that regardless of their alleged crimes, every person is allowed to have legal representation in—and out—of the courtroom. The Browns’ are also exercising their rights to request that a law be reviewed. Some laws should be reexamined. Other laws need to be changed.

Call a Utah Criminal Defense Attorney

If you have a case that requires defending, don’t hesitate to call a Utah criminal defense attorney immediately. When you are facing criminal charges, go with an attorney who specializes in criminal defense cases. Take your freedom seriously and contact a Utah criminal defense attorney today.

Utah Legislature Ponders DUI Checkpoints Bill

Utah Criminal Defense Blog, on the topic of  Alcohol in Utah, Constitutional Rights
0comment

The Utah Legislature is currently considering banning police DUI checkpoints throughout the state. The bill, also known as HB 140, is sponsored by Representative David Butterfield. HB 140 was approved by the Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Committee by an 8-5 vote and will now go to the House floor.

Photo: Stacey Huggins

Proponents of the bill argue that allowing DUI checkpoints border on unconstitutional behavior, unless very restricted conditions are followed by law enforcement. HB 140 would only allow an administrative traffic checkpoint under certain conditions. A motor vehicle may be stopped and its occupants detained by an enforcement officer when the officer:

• Is acting pursuant to an authorized search warrant or arrest warrant
• Has probable cause to arrest or search
• Has reasonable suspicion that criminal activity has occurred or is occurring, or
• Is acting under emergency circumstances, or
• Is acting pursuant to an authorized administrative traffic checkpoint authority granted by a magistrate under particular circumstances.

What Would be Allowed at a Checkpoint?

Officers using an administrative traffic checkpoint would have the primary purpose of inspecting, verifying or detecting invasive species, violations of Title 23 and other circumstances that are specifically distinguishable by a magistrate from a general interest in crime control.

Various law enforcement officers and the president of Mothers Against Drunk Driving testified against repealing the law allowing for DUI checkpoints, stating their effectiveness in deterring drinking while driving.

Are You For HB 140 or Against it?

This is an interesting debate and one which will most likely receive more attention as the entire House ponders the proposed bill. Lines are already being drawn for and against HB 140, and if you have an opinion you should make sure your local representative knows where you stand.

An Attorney Is Available To Help You

We aren’t arguing one way or another, except to say that all citizens of Utah deserve to have their Constitutional rights protected. There are Utah criminal defense attorneys who can help you work through any criminal proceedings you’re involved in. It doesn’t matter whether your case involves a DUI, you should contact a Utah criminal defense attorney and get the legal help you need.

Theft of $11,000 in Utah

Utah Criminal Defense Blog, on the topic of  Hiring a Lawyer
0comment

Theft is never convenient for the victim, regardless of the items stolen. However, having a large sum of money disappear from your car would, understandably, be highly distressing. Recently, a woman left her purse containing $11,000 in her car while she went into a funeral home in Salt Lake City. When she returned to her car, she discovered that it had been broken into and her purse taken—including the money.

Photo: Purple Slog

Theft and Vehicle Burglary

A man and woman have been charged with theft and vehicle burglary in connection with the missing money. According to one of the defendants in the case, the money was spent on drugs within less than two weeks after the theft. Another defendant supposedly admitted guilt to law enforcement.

Always Consult With a Utah Criminal Defense Attorney

We often recommend contacting an attorney if you become involved in a criminal incident, generally because an attorney can give you good advice on dealing with law enforcement. One rule of thumb is that you do not talk to police without the consent of your attorney. When a police officer tells you that what you say can be used against you in a court of law, he’s not kidding. If you have information about a crime that you need to get off your chest, talk to a Utah criminal defense attorney.

Remember that police and prosecutors will likely do everything they can to see you convicted of a crime. They won’t be looking out for your best interests. However, your attorney is your biggest advocate in all aspects of a criminal investigation and a trial, if it goes that far.

Look for a criminal defense attorney who has experience, intelligence and a record of success both in and out of the courtroom. Finding the right attorney may mean all the difference in your freedom.

State v Price Interlocutory Appeal

Utah Criminal Defense Blog, on the topic of  Constitutional Rights
0comment

In State v Price, Mr. Price filed an interlocutory appeal with the Utah Supreme Court based on the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress in a case where he (Price) is charged with causing death while driving with a measurable controlled substance and failing to yield the right-of-way.

What is an Interlocutory Appeal?

Most appeals happen only after a case is over. But, sometimes a trial judge makes important decisions that could affect the entire outcome of a case. For example, a judge’s decision either to suppress or admit certain evidence could determine whether a defendant takes a case to trial or seeks a plea deal. If a judge denies a defendant’s motion to suppress damaging evidence, the defendant might want to appeal before a jury hears the evidence. An appeal before the case is over is called an interlocutory appeal. The party seeking an interlocutory appeal must ask permission from the appellate court before the interlocutory appeal will be accepted.

What Lead to State v Price?

Price was involved in an auto accident that resulted in the death of another person. At the scene of the accident, Price failed a field sobriety test. The police got a search warrant for Price’s blood, which was tested for alcohol, cocaine, THC (marijuana), morphine and methamphetamine. His blood tested positive for THC, leading to his felony criminal charge.

Price argued that the blood evidence should be thrown out of court because the warrant only specified that his blood should be tested for alcohol – not THC. Price claimed that expanding the search to include THC violated his Fourth Amendment rights. The Fourth Amendment states:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

The district court denied Price’s argument, finding that Price lost any reasonable expectation of privacy when his blood was tested for intoxicants because there was sufficient probable cause to support the issuance of the search warrant and the blood sample was lawfully taken from Price.

The Result

The Utah Supreme Court agreed with the district court’s denial of Price’s motion to suppress the blood evidence of THC. This means that the case of State v Price, which was on hold during the Supreme Court’s deliberations, can continue and the prosecution can present the blood evidence blood evidence to the jury. Because the damaging evidence against him was not suppressed, Price will now have to decide whether to take his chances with a jury or try to work out a plea bargain.

Hiring an Attorney

When you are in a legal bind, don’t wait to contact a Utah criminal defense attorney. An experienced, reputable attorney can provide you with a vigorous defense, including knowing when certain legal questions need to be raised. Don’t gamble with your freedom. Call a Utah criminal defense attorney today.

Mouse Shooting Ends in Rape Arrest

Utah Criminal Defense Blog, on the topic of  Constitutional Rights
0comment

An arrest in Taylorsville for rape of a child was the end to what began with a man shooting at a mouse. If that sounds bizarre to you, you’re probably not alone.

Photo: Ernst Vikne

Tuesday was a busy night for law enforcement and a medical crew at Paul Kunzler’s Taylorsville home. The events began when one of Kunzler’s three roommates tried to shoot a mouse in the kitchen. Instead of hitting the mouse, a shot went through the wall and struck another roommate who was in the bathroom.

A medical crew and police arrived and the shooting victim was taken to the hospital. While at the home, police discovered a 13-year-old girl hiding in a closet. Reportedly, the girl and Kunzler had been having a sexual relationship for the past four months. Kunzler is currently in jail while being investigated for rape of a child, sodomy of a child and sexual abuse of a child.

Rape of a child is a first-degree felony charge, punishable by 25 years to life in prison. If certain other conditions are met, the person charged could face life in prison without the possibility of parole. Rape of a child is one of the kinds of first-degree felonies where imprisonment is mandatory. Sodomy on a child can result in similar charges to rape of a child; imprisonment is also mandatory. Sexual abuse of a child is generally a second-degree felony, but aggravated sexual abuse of a child would raise the charge to a first-degree felony.

Some basic rules to follow if you are arrested are: don’t talk to police and contact a Utah criminal defense attorney. You are under no obligation to try to explain your situation to law enforcement, and as you will likely be told, anything you say can be used against you. That means exactly what you think it does.

Don’t wait to get legal help if you are facing any criminal charges. You owe it to yourself to have an experienced criminal defense attorney on your side.

Utah Man with Skull Shrine Set Free

Utah Criminal Defense Blog, on the topic of  Constitutional Rights
0comment

A Utah man recently had his felony charges for abuse or desecration of a dead human body dropped after prosecutors determined that he was using human skulls for legitimate religious purposes.

Utah has laws that cover desecration of human remains

Photo: Neil and Kathy Carey

Roberto Casillas-Correlas was arrested in March when it was discovered that he had a number of human skulls in a shed behind his home. Casillas-Correlas was a priest in his religion, Santeria, and apparently was using the skulls in a religious ritual that he believed would help a sick relative. Santeria is a religion based on the African way of worshipping combined with certain elements of Catholicism.

Casillas-Correlas was facing two counts of abuse or desecration of a dead human body, which could have sent him to prison for up to five years. The statute involving this crime lists the following as illegal, if a person intentionally and unlawfully:

  • Fails to report finding a dead human body to law enforcement;
  • Disturbs, moves, removes, conceals or destroys any part of a dead human body;
  • Takes a dead human body that has been buried from its burial place, without a court order;
  • Dismembers, damages or detaches a dead human body in any way; or
  • Attempts or succeeds at sexual penetration of a dead human body.

The occurrence of any of the above-mentioned situations is considered a third-degree felony.

Fortunately for Casillas-Correlas, prosecutors recognized that he was only acting according to his religious beliefs, whether or not they agreed with him. Freedom of religious expression is a right that most Americans cherish.

If you believe your First Amendment rights were ignored by law enforcement and you are now in a difficult legal situation, take time to call a respected Utah criminal defense attorney. He or she can listen to your side of the story and advise you as to what can be done. If someone else has taken your freedom for granted, don’t leave an equitable solution to chance. Get the legal help you need today.