Los Angeles - Ex-celebrity sleuth Anthony Pellicano, who's serving a 15-year prison term in a federal racketeering, conspiracy and wiretapping case, pleaded no contest today to a criminal threats charge involving a news reporter.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge William N. Sterling immediately sentenced Pellicano to three years in prison --- to be served at the same time as the 65-year-old defendant's federal prison term.
Co-defendant Alexander Frederick Proctor, 66, also pleaded no contest to the same charge. He was ordered to serve three years in prison, which is to be served at the same time as his 10-year federal prison term in a drug case.
A conspiracy charge against Pellicano and Proctor was dismissed as a result of their pleas on the criminal threats charge, according to the District Attorney's Office.
The two were charged by Los Angeles County prosecutors in June 2005 involving an attempt to scare Anita Busch, who was then working for the Los Angeles Times.
Pellicano hired Proctor between April and June 2002 to intimidate the reporter "to cause her to fear for her life," and Proctor went to Busch's home that June and "threatened her by placing a dead fish with a rose in its mouth on the windshield of her car," according to the criminal complaint.
"He made a hole in the windshield with the intent to make it appear like a bullet hole. He also placed a sign with the word `stop' on the windshield," according to the document.
At a preliminary hearing in August in which the two men were ordered to stand trial, retired FBI agent Stanley Ornellas said the reason for the threat was a series of articles Busch was working on that probed actor Steven Seagal's purported relationship with Mafia figures. Seagal has strongly denied the allegations.
A search of Pellicano's office turned up computer records containing Busch's driver's license number and other information, the retired federal agent testified.
Source
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Saturday, November 7, 2009
Supreme Court Cites Los Angeles DUI Attorney as Authority
LONG BEACH, Calif., Aug. 5 /PRNewswire/ -- In a landmark decision, the California Supreme Court has cited a Los Angeles DUI lawyer as authority in reversing previous law prohibiting California DUI attorneys from offering evidence in trial that breathalyzers used in drunk driving cases are susceptible to inherent error.
In California v. Neal, the Supreme Court three times cited the legal textbook California Drunk Driving Defense, 4th edition as scientific authority for its decision. Used by California DUI lawyers statewide, the best-selling text on the subject is authored by Los Angeles DUI attorney Lawrence Taylor. As reported in TheNewspaper.com: A Journal of the Politics of Driving:
The California Supreme Court last Thursday entered a ruling allowing motorists accused of driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI) to question the reliability of the breathalyzer machinery used to secure convictions.
"Simply put, the machines all automatically convert the amount of alcohol tested in the tiny amount of breath taken from the suspect," California DUI attorney Lawrence Taylor explained. "The internal computer multiplies the amount by 2100 -- using the average ratio of alcohol in blood to alcohol in breath -- to estimate the amount of alcohol in the suspect's blood. Problem: We are not all average. And ratios vary from 1300:1 to 3500:1."
With this in mind, the supreme court held that partition ratio evidence may now be raised as a defense to a general DUI charge. The court, however, in previous rulings made it clear that motorists could be convicted of per se DUI regardless of any scientific evidence regarding actual intoxication. The high court cited Lawrence Taylor as an authority on the subject three times in its decision, but Taylor blasted the decision as irrational.
Known nationally as "The Dean of DUI Attorneys", Lawrence Taylor is a former Los Angeles deputy district attorney and Fulbright Professor of Law who has lectured to DUI lawyers in over 41 states. Taylor currently heads his law firm of 8 DUI defense lawyers serving clients in Los Angeles, Orange County, Riverside-San Bernardino, San Diego and the San Francisco Bay area.
The decision has been widely applauded by DUI defense attorneys in California, while prosecutors have criticized the decision, predicting that it will result in far more DUI lawyers winning acquittals.
Source
In California v. Neal, the Supreme Court three times cited the legal textbook California Drunk Driving Defense, 4th edition as scientific authority for its decision. Used by California DUI lawyers statewide, the best-selling text on the subject is authored by Los Angeles DUI attorney Lawrence Taylor. As reported in TheNewspaper.com: A Journal of the Politics of Driving:
The California Supreme Court last Thursday entered a ruling allowing motorists accused of driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI) to question the reliability of the breathalyzer machinery used to secure convictions.
"Simply put, the machines all automatically convert the amount of alcohol tested in the tiny amount of breath taken from the suspect," California DUI attorney Lawrence Taylor explained. "The internal computer multiplies the amount by 2100 -- using the average ratio of alcohol in blood to alcohol in breath -- to estimate the amount of alcohol in the suspect's blood. Problem: We are not all average. And ratios vary from 1300:1 to 3500:1."
With this in mind, the supreme court held that partition ratio evidence may now be raised as a defense to a general DUI charge. The court, however, in previous rulings made it clear that motorists could be convicted of per se DUI regardless of any scientific evidence regarding actual intoxication. The high court cited Lawrence Taylor as an authority on the subject three times in its decision, but Taylor blasted the decision as irrational.
Known nationally as "The Dean of DUI Attorneys", Lawrence Taylor is a former Los Angeles deputy district attorney and Fulbright Professor of Law who has lectured to DUI lawyers in over 41 states. Taylor currently heads his law firm of 8 DUI defense lawyers serving clients in Los Angeles, Orange County, Riverside-San Bernardino, San Diego and the San Francisco Bay area.
The decision has been widely applauded by DUI defense attorneys in California, while prosecutors have criticized the decision, predicting that it will result in far more DUI lawyers winning acquittals.
Source
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Racism Charged in Los Angeles as Economy Goes to Pot
LOS ANGELES, Calif. (SEND2PRESS NEWSWIRE) -- It is said that Obama has stopped the economy from falling off a cliff, but in Los Angeles it is the Cannabis Industry that is saving landlords of commercial properties, says Pastor Craig Rubin. One year ago Rubin, founder of Craig X Academy, an on-line marijuana school that teaches students in a course called, "Profit from Pot," rented an abandoned building in the SORO district to provide medical cannabis to qualified patients. Rubin has recently bombarded the Internet with ads for his service and is marketing the project under www.profitfrompot.com, but finds himself in a fight with the City of Los Angeles to save his pot club.
Medical marijuana is supposed to be not-for-profit and Pastor Rubin set up a not-for-profit religious group, Temple 420, to do just that. However, after an appearance on Showtime's hit series Weeds where Rubin played the owner of a medical marijuana club Rubin's house of worship was raided. Rubin and his wife lost their house and lost all their vehicles. The City of Los Angeles spent millions of dollars closing down Temple 420 where Rubin paid over $10,000 a month rent to be on the famous Hollywood Blvd.
After two years of economic struggling, Rubin and his wife have seven children, the judge in the case (Rubin was convicted of selling marijuana and sentenced to five years in jail, but since he had no prior criminal record the judge gave him probation), Judge Drew Edwards, ruled that he could, "Own and operate a marijuana facility (club)."
The City of Los Angeles created a moratorium on marijuana clubs, but created a hardship for people like Rubin who had previously owned a club and were shut down because of DEA letters to landlords. Even though Rubin had been arrested and was charged with selling marijuana he knew what he was doing was legal. He had only been in operation for 38 days when he was raided, but continued to operate on Hollywood Blvd. for months after the arrest until the DEA wrote a letter to Rubin's landlord threatening to seize his mini-mall if Rubin was not evicted.
Medical marijuana is supposed to be not-for-profit and Pastor Rubin set up a not-for-profit religious group, Temple 420, to do just that. However, after an appearance on Showtime's hit series Weeds where Rubin played the owner of a medical marijuana club Rubin's house of worship was raided. Rubin and his wife lost their house and lost all their vehicles. The City of Los Angeles spent millions of dollars closing down Temple 420 where Rubin paid over $10,000 a month rent to be on the famous Hollywood Blvd.
After two years of economic struggling, Rubin and his wife have seven children, the judge in the case (Rubin was convicted of selling marijuana and sentenced to five years in jail, but since he had no prior criminal record the judge gave him probation), Judge Drew Edwards, ruled that he could, "Own and operate a marijuana facility (club)."
The City of Los Angeles created a moratorium on marijuana clubs, but created a hardship for people like Rubin who had previously owned a club and were shut down because of DEA letters to landlords. Even though Rubin had been arrested and was charged with selling marijuana he knew what he was doing was legal. He had only been in operation for 38 days when he was raided, but continued to operate on Hollywood Blvd. for months after the arrest until the DEA wrote a letter to Rubin's landlord threatening to seize his mini-mall if Rubin was not evicted.
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
LA city attorney seeks documents in Jackson probe
LOS ANGELES — A spokesman says the Los Angeles city attorney has been requesting documents and conducting interviews as part of an investigation into the city's role in Michael Jackson's lavish memorial.
Spokesman John Franklin said Wednesday there is no timetable to conclude the probe examining civil and criminal issues.
City Attorney Carmen Trutanich created a whirl of questions after announcing last week that investigators turned up possible criminal activity while looking into whether City Hall could recoup an estimated $1.4 million it spent on police and other services dedicated to the Jackson tribute.
Monday, September 28, 2009
Jury Pins $370 Million Verdict on Former Guess CEO
The millionaire magnate who steered the rise of Guess jeans had sued five former employees of his real estate company for embezzlement and fraud, but when those employees filed cross-complaints alleging libel and intentional infliction of emotional distress a year ago, the French designer's case went downhill. Marciano had sold his stake in Guess and left the company in 1993.
Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Elizabeth White dismissed Marciano's suit in December, after Marciano refused to comply with discovery or show up for scheduled depositions, according to lawyers for the former employees.
Then in March, White struck Marciano's answer to the cross-complaints, rendering him mostly unable to mount a defense. White's decision came after Marciano continued to disobey discovery orders, the employees' lawyers said Tuesday.
"We got a lot of gifts in this case," said R. Rex Parris, a Lancaster, Calif., attorney who represented two former Marciano office workers.
In May, White held a court trial to determine whether Marciano was liable in the cross-complaints against him. After the judge determined that he was, a jury trial on the amount of damages began last week.
The jury held Marciano liable for slightly more than $74 million in damages for each of the five former employees, for past and future suffering, injury to reputation and future economic loss, according to their lawyers.
During what was essentially a default "prove-up" last week, Browne Woods George partner Marcy Railsback referred to herself as counsel of record, according to a transcript. Browne Woods partner Eric George declined to comment Tuesday, except to say that he has represented Marciano in connection with his complaint and the cross-complaints and might represent him on appeal.
Marciano used at least 17 separate law firms throughout the nearly two-year proceedings, according to Parris. Michael Reznick, a lawyer who described himself as Marciano's "personal attorney" in court July 22, did not return a call late Tuesday afternoon.
On that day, Marciano came to court in what Parris and his fellow lawyers described as a "surprise" appearance. Marciano had never actually been served with a subpoena, but he accepted White's offer to take the stand "with pleasure," according to a transcript of the proceedings.
George wasn't present, but Railsback summoned him to court once Marciano appeared, according to the transcript.
"One of the big factors is that [Marciano] came into trial and he admitted to the jury that he was on a crusade and indicated that he doesn't intend to stop," said Michael Partos, a Los Angeles lawyer at Cozen O'Connor who represented one of the former employees.
Parris said that the size of the verdict was partially the result of putting on a significant amount of evidence, including expert testimony, that described the depression his two clients had experienced because of Marciano.
"Now they're prone to clinical depression," Parris said. "Their ability to experience joy in life is severely diminished."
Source
Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Elizabeth White dismissed Marciano's suit in December, after Marciano refused to comply with discovery or show up for scheduled depositions, according to lawyers for the former employees.
Then in March, White struck Marciano's answer to the cross-complaints, rendering him mostly unable to mount a defense. White's decision came after Marciano continued to disobey discovery orders, the employees' lawyers said Tuesday.
"We got a lot of gifts in this case," said R. Rex Parris, a Lancaster, Calif., attorney who represented two former Marciano office workers.
In May, White held a court trial to determine whether Marciano was liable in the cross-complaints against him. After the judge determined that he was, a jury trial on the amount of damages began last week.
The jury held Marciano liable for slightly more than $74 million in damages for each of the five former employees, for past and future suffering, injury to reputation and future economic loss, according to their lawyers.
During what was essentially a default "prove-up" last week, Browne Woods George partner Marcy Railsback referred to herself as counsel of record, according to a transcript. Browne Woods partner Eric George declined to comment Tuesday, except to say that he has represented Marciano in connection with his complaint and the cross-complaints and might represent him on appeal.
Marciano used at least 17 separate law firms throughout the nearly two-year proceedings, according to Parris. Michael Reznick, a lawyer who described himself as Marciano's "personal attorney" in court July 22, did not return a call late Tuesday afternoon.
On that day, Marciano came to court in what Parris and his fellow lawyers described as a "surprise" appearance. Marciano had never actually been served with a subpoena, but he accepted White's offer to take the stand "with pleasure," according to a transcript of the proceedings.
George wasn't present, but Railsback summoned him to court once Marciano appeared, according to the transcript.
"One of the big factors is that [Marciano] came into trial and he admitted to the jury that he was on a crusade and indicated that he doesn't intend to stop," said Michael Partos, a Los Angeles lawyer at Cozen O'Connor who represented one of the former employees.
Parris said that the size of the verdict was partially the result of putting on a significant amount of evidence, including expert testimony, that described the depression his two clients had experienced because of Marciano.
"Now they're prone to clinical depression," Parris said. "Their ability to experience joy in life is severely diminished."
Source
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Ex-Armenian consul among five arrested in alleged deportation-blocking scheme
Five people, including a former Armenian consul, have been arrested in alleged schemes to block the deportation of illegal immigrants convicted of murder and other serious crimes, federal immigration officials announced Tuesday.
The defendants allegedly obtained letters from the Armenian Consulate in Los Angeles and then sold them -- for as much as $35,000 each -- to at least two dozen convicted criminals facing deportation, officials said. The letters, which were sent to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said the Armenian government could not verify that the immigrants were citizens and therefore could not let them back into the country.
Counter-terrorism investigators find alleged identity theft ring
Unable to deport the immigrants, U.S. officials were forced to release them. By law, the immigration agency cannot keep criminals in detention for more than six months beyond their prison sentences if deportation is unlikely.
The immigrants who received the "letters of refusal" had been convicted of murder, attempted murder, robbery and other crimes, officials said.
"It's a great scheme," said Jennifer Silliman, deputy special agent in charge of the immigration agency's Los Angeles office. "You have got these career criminals, many of whom are violent, circumventing the system and essentially buying themselves a place in the United States."
Grigor Hovhannissian, Armenia's consul general in Los Angeles, said he and others within the Armenian government were committed to cooperating with U.S. authorities in the ongoing investigation.
"It is in our vital interest to sort this out," he said. "It does tremendous harm to the prestige of our country."
Hovhannissian said his predecessor, Norair Ghalumian, had not been part of the government for several years but allegedly was handling consular duties on his own.
"Outside of his professional duties, he may have been offering services that were totally illegal," he said.
Ghalumian, 52, was consul from 1999 to 2003, according to U.S. officials. The other defendants included Hakop Hovanesyan, 54, a former employee of the consulate; Margarita Mkrtchyan, 41, a Beverly Hills attorney; Oganes Nardos, 36, a substance abuse counselor; and Elvis Madatyan, 47, who owns an auto body business and a bakery.
All five appeared in court Tuesday afternoon to face federal charges of obstructing immigration proceedings. Four were ordered released on bonds ranging from $50,000 to $200,000 and told to return to court Aug. 17 for a preliminary hearing. Nardos' detention hearing was continued until Aug. 7 because of questions about whether he entered the country fraudulently. If convicted, each could be sentenced to five years in federal prison.
"These defendants endangered the safety and security of United States residents," U.S. Atty. Thomas P. O'Brien said in a statement.
The defendants' family members, gathered at the courthouse in Los Angeles, expressed disbelief about the charges.
"I am shocked," said Ghalumian's wife, Katarine Simonian. "A lot of people know him as a very honest person."
The immigration agency began its investigation about two years ago and used undercover agents to contact the defendants and obtain the illicit letters. All five people were allegedly carrying out the same scheme but were not part of a larger criminal organization, officials said.
Immigration authorities executed search warrants at various locations, including Mkrtchyan's Glendale residence, Hovanesyan's travel agency and Nardos' residence, and left with refusal letters and official stationery from the consulate. Immigration officials have identified some of those who received the letters and said they could face federal criminal charges.
Although the letters in this case were allegedly obtained fraudulently, there are thousands of immigrants across the country with legitimate letters of refusal. They have served time for crimes and been ordered deported but are still here because the U.S. cannot get passports or visas for them. Among them are Armenians born in the former Soviet Union, Palestinians born in refugee camps and Africans from countries whose international borders have shifted.
Source
The defendants allegedly obtained letters from the Armenian Consulate in Los Angeles and then sold them -- for as much as $35,000 each -- to at least two dozen convicted criminals facing deportation, officials said. The letters, which were sent to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said the Armenian government could not verify that the immigrants were citizens and therefore could not let them back into the country.
Counter-terrorism investigators find alleged identity theft ring
Unable to deport the immigrants, U.S. officials were forced to release them. By law, the immigration agency cannot keep criminals in detention for more than six months beyond their prison sentences if deportation is unlikely.
The immigrants who received the "letters of refusal" had been convicted of murder, attempted murder, robbery and other crimes, officials said.
"It's a great scheme," said Jennifer Silliman, deputy special agent in charge of the immigration agency's Los Angeles office. "You have got these career criminals, many of whom are violent, circumventing the system and essentially buying themselves a place in the United States."
Grigor Hovhannissian, Armenia's consul general in Los Angeles, said he and others within the Armenian government were committed to cooperating with U.S. authorities in the ongoing investigation.
"It is in our vital interest to sort this out," he said. "It does tremendous harm to the prestige of our country."
Hovhannissian said his predecessor, Norair Ghalumian, had not been part of the government for several years but allegedly was handling consular duties on his own.
"Outside of his professional duties, he may have been offering services that were totally illegal," he said.
Ghalumian, 52, was consul from 1999 to 2003, according to U.S. officials. The other defendants included Hakop Hovanesyan, 54, a former employee of the consulate; Margarita Mkrtchyan, 41, a Beverly Hills attorney; Oganes Nardos, 36, a substance abuse counselor; and Elvis Madatyan, 47, who owns an auto body business and a bakery.
All five appeared in court Tuesday afternoon to face federal charges of obstructing immigration proceedings. Four were ordered released on bonds ranging from $50,000 to $200,000 and told to return to court Aug. 17 for a preliminary hearing. Nardos' detention hearing was continued until Aug. 7 because of questions about whether he entered the country fraudulently. If convicted, each could be sentenced to five years in federal prison.
"These defendants endangered the safety and security of United States residents," U.S. Atty. Thomas P. O'Brien said in a statement.
The defendants' family members, gathered at the courthouse in Los Angeles, expressed disbelief about the charges.
"I am shocked," said Ghalumian's wife, Katarine Simonian. "A lot of people know him as a very honest person."
The immigration agency began its investigation about two years ago and used undercover agents to contact the defendants and obtain the illicit letters. All five people were allegedly carrying out the same scheme but were not part of a larger criminal organization, officials said.
Immigration authorities executed search warrants at various locations, including Mkrtchyan's Glendale residence, Hovanesyan's travel agency and Nardos' residence, and left with refusal letters and official stationery from the consulate. Immigration officials have identified some of those who received the letters and said they could face federal criminal charges.
Although the letters in this case were allegedly obtained fraudulently, there are thousands of immigrants across the country with legitimate letters of refusal. They have served time for crimes and been ordered deported but are still here because the U.S. cannot get passports or visas for them. Among them are Armenians born in the former Soviet Union, Palestinians born in refugee camps and Africans from countries whose international borders have shifted.
Source
Monday, August 31, 2009
Three Strikes Law and Los Angeles
Norman Williams found out first-hand how tough California’s "Three Strikes" laws can be: after twice being convicted on felony burglary charges, the Long Beach native was sentenced to 25 years to life in prison for stealing a car jack and tools from a tow truck. Under normal circumstances, his last offense would have been classified as petty theft while the value of the items stolen should have made the crime a misdemeanor offense. Williams, however, had had a long history of drug abuse and a criminal record beginning with burglary at age ten.
With such an egregious criminal history, the famous "Three Strikes" laws bumped Williams’ relatively minor charges up to felony status, paving the way to his third strike. Thanks to efforts from a fledgling Stanford University law school program, Williams’ sentence was reduced to just 10 years. Since Williams had already served 13 years of his original sentence, he was released from Folsom State Prison on April 24th. With two standing felony convictions, Williams is currently working with a job training program in Northern California and trying to stay out of further legal trouble.
The "Three Strikes" laws have been controversial since their inception. As a "tough on crime" program, the laws effectively sentence criminal offenders to 25 years to life in prison for three felony offenses. In an attempt to protect Californians from violent repeat criminal offenders, the "Three Strikes" laws also reduce prison credits for good behavior and can enhance penalties for two or more felony criminal offenses. The laws also provide provisions allowing multiple criminal acts performed in conjunction to be counted as separate offenses. For example, burglary with a firearm that results in bodily injury to someone and the theft of more than $400 in value could be charged as several distinct crimes, allowing the defendant to rack up several "strikes" in one set of legal proceedings. Felony criminal offenses are nothing to take lightly in California as they can land you in a state prison for the rest of your life.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)