Los Angeles County Criminal Lawyer Blog

Two Los Angeles men, one a current and the other a former baggage handler for Los Angeles International Airport (LAX), were arrested on February 2 for stealing tens of thousands of dollars from airline passengers' luggage. The two were arrested in their respective homes in South Los Angeles by officers from the Los Angeles Police Department and LAX, according to The Los Angeles Times.

According to authorities, police were issued search warrants for the men's homes and discovered more than $100,000 worth of cash and stolen property in total from the premises. While details concerning how long the operation had lasted or how the men were able to take so much are forthcoming, police are investigating whether the thefts were a part of a larger criminal ring victimizing LAX passengers. The officers involved in the takedown are from a task force focused on criminal operations at LAX.

Under California Penal Code Section 487(a), the unlawful taking of money or property valued greater than $950 is classified as felony Grand Theft, which can be punished by a maximum of one year in county jail or three years in state prison. Penal Code section 487(a) is also what is known as a wobbler, meaning that it can also be charged as a misdemeanor. Where Grand Theft is charged as a misdemeanor those convicted may be punished by a $1,000 fine, imprisonment for up to one year in county jail, or both. If the theft was less than $950, those convicted may be be charged with misdemeanor Petty Theft under California Penal Code Sections 484 and 488. Those convicted of Petty Theft can be punished by a $1,000 fine, imprisonment in county jail for up to six months, or both. In the case of these LAX thefts, the suspects may have multiple charges of each leveled at them due to many incidents of theft at LAX, leading to a great number of penalties.

If you or a loved one is facing any form of theft charges in Southern California, the Los Angeles theft defense attorney, Daniel Kann, has the experience necessary to have your charges reduced or thrown out entirely. For more information, call the Law Offices of Daniel Kann at (310) 954-9356.

Los Angeles Sheriff's Department officers operating in the Santa Clarita Valley arrested three teenagers in Santa Clarita after they stole beer from a liquor store, then returned to assault the store clerk on January 8.

The male trio, a 19-year-old, 18-year-old, and a juvenile, had allegedly stolen beer from the store earlier in the night, but returned an hour later in an attempt to take the surveillance video of the robbery, according to The Los Angeles Times.

When the suspects returned, they threatened the clerk who was working at the time and demanded the video footage of the Santa Clarita theft crime.

During a scuffle with the employee, one of the suspects cut the man on the arm with a knife.

The three fled once again, but were soon arrested when Sheriff's deputies set up a containment area to catch the suspects. The three have been booked on charges of theft, witness intimidation, and assault with a deadly weapon.

Assault with a deadly weapon is a very serious offense in California, and can result in severe penalties. Under California Penal Code Section 245 (a), those found guilty of the crime, "shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years, or in a county jail for not exceeding one year, or by a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or by both the fine and imprisonment."

If you are facing assault charges in Southern California, it is in your best interest to contact a qualified attorney immediately. The Santa Clarita assault defense attorneys at the Law Offices of Daniel Kann are dedicated to protecting those charged with criminal acts in Southern California. For more information on how our law team can help you today, call us at (888) 744-7730.

California law, all theft crimes, including embezzlement, larceny, and stealing, fall under the broader category of theft, which is split into two categories: petty theft and grand theft. Depending on the monetary value of the crime and the circumstances surrounding it, these crimes can be subject to different punishments.

The division between grand and petty theft is due to the monetary value of what has been willfully and illegally taken. According to California Penal Code Section 487 (a), grand theft occurs "when the money, labor, or real or personal property taken is of a value exceeding nine hundred fifty dollars." Grand theft has several other applications and can include instances when someone steals or otherwise illegally takes farm or aquacultural products, crops, and animals that are valued over $250, according to Penal Code 487 (1) (a) and 487 (2).

Grand theft of real estate is also subject to a lower division line, as "Every person who converts real estate of the value of two hundred fifty dollars ($250) or more into personal property by severance from the realty of another" and illegally takes that property has committed grand theft under California Penal Code Section 487b.

When a theft does not meet the criteria of grand theft, it is deemed as petty theft. In California, petty theft is punishable under Penal Code Section 490 by a $1,000 fine, six months in county jail, or both. Most instances of petty theft come about in the form of shoplifting. Grand theft, however, is punished by a maximum of one year in county jail or state prison for 16 months, 2 years or 3 years. When grand theft involves theft of a firearm, the subject can be can also be punished by 16 months, 2 years, or 3 years of imprisonment and the charge would fall under California's Three Strikes Law. Under this law, if a person is convicted of three strike crimes in the state of California, they can receive a sentence of 25 years to life in prison.

Both petty and grand theft charges can result in serious punishments and lasting consequences. The Pasadena theft defense attorneys at The Law Offices of Daniel Kann can help if you or a loved one is facing theft charges in Southern California. Call us today for a complimentary consultation on your case at (626) 376-9218.

Los Angeles police have arrested three suspects in the case of Craigslist scammers who fraudulently took renters' money by taking deposits from them for apartments that they did not have the power to rent or lease. 20 victims have stepped forward to report their losses caused by the fraud, and detectives believe that there may be at least a dozen more victims who have not identified themselves, according to KTLA.

The two men were arrested when Los Angeles Police Department SWAT stormed a Silver Lake apartment that is believed to have been the base of their operations and arrested another in a different part of town. In order to fraudulently gain victims' money, the men would advertise on the classified website Craigslist for apartments in the Baldwin Village and Hollywood areas that they were looking to rent out.

Prospective renters would arrive at the apartment and be able to tour the apartment; the next day, the victim would meet with one of the men and give them the deposit for the apartment and receive a key. When the renters came to the apartment to move in they would find that the key did not work and they could not contact the men.

Fraud is defined in California Penal Code Section 484 (a) as anyone "who causes or procures others to report falsely of his or her wealth or mercantile character and by thus imposing upon any person, obtains credit and thereby fraudulently gets or obtains possession of money, or property or obtains the labor or service of another".

Those guilty of misdemeanor theft or fraud can be punished under California Penal Code 484b, and it "shall be punishable by a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year."

Being charged with theft, fraud, or any other forms of stealing can carry serious penalties in California that permanently alter the course of one's life. If you or a loved one has been charged with one of these crimes, the Los Angeles fraud defense attorneys at the Law Offices of Daniel Kann can defend your rights in court. Contact us at (310) 954-9356 to find out how we can help you today.

Sources:http://www.ktla.com/news/landing/ktla-craigslist-rental-scam,0,2351677.story; http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=484-502.9; http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/489.html

The Ventura County Star reports that a 42-year-old man has been arrested for eating and not paying his bill.

Theft charges in Ventura can result in years behind bars. And in California, the penalties vary based on the facts of the case, such as whether a weapon was used, as well as the value of what was taken. Of course, that's unlikely in this case. But a long string of petty crimes can lead to probation violations and other significant legal issues.

What can be difficult for prosecutors sometimes is being able to prove the value of what was taken. They must have credible evidence to prove the value, otherwise, it must remain in doubt.

As an experienced Ventura criminal defense attorney will tell you, theft charges can be difficult to defend when prosecutors stack the count by over-charging a defendant.

According to the newspaper article, a 42-year-old transient was arrested after attempting to leave a restaurant without paying for the food. According to police, the man had stolen from businesses in the area in the past and managers were concerned for their safety.

The man allegedly ate, drank several glasses of beer, and tried to pay with a credit card he allegedly found on the street. When the card came back declined, the man allegedly threatened staff and took off on his bicycle.

Police found him nearby and charged him with suspicion of defrauding an innkeeper, unlawfully using lost property, driving a bicycle while under the influence and resisting arrest.

In cases where theft is alleged, police must have witnesses who are unflappable in their testimony and that is rare. In many cases, witnesses are unreliable in that they are either far away from the alleged crime, under the influence or are coerced into saying something by police officers.

And this can lead to a defendant's rights being stripped away. Everyone charged with a crime has a right to have a fair trial. And that means holding the state and police to the burden of proof to beyond all reasonable doubt. Simply said, this means that if there is any doubt, the defendant should be found not guilty.

But jurors sometimes have a tough time with this concept. Some believe that if they are on a criminal jury, they have a duty to find the defendant guilty because the person is being tried for the crime. Many falsely accused people have gone to trial and been found guilty. I would bet few Americans would want to have a jury who believes the person who is charged with an alleged offense is automatically guilty.

In theft cases especially, recovery of the alleged stolen goods is critical. If police charge a person with stealing, but are unable to recover what has been taken, isn't that doubt? If fuzzy surveillance video shows a person who may resemble the defendant, is that doubt? What about witnesses who "think" the defendant is the person who committed the crime?

There are many avenues to a good defense and an experienced criminal defense attorney in Ventura and throughout Southern California will explore all opportunities. This is essential for any defendant charged with crimes in our state.

Continue reading "'Dine and Dash' Leads to Ventura Man's Arrest" »

Ventura police recently arrested six teens and young adults they say are connected to 300 to 500 residential burglaries, the Ventura County Star reported.

That is a daunting number of crimes these suspects are accused of committing. But juvenile suspects, with the right Ventura County Juvenile Attorney, can work to get the best resolution for their case, which could mean keeping the case in the juvenile justice system rather than the adult criminal justice system. Penalties for juveniles are designed to rehabilitate rather than punish. But the wrong attorney might not properly fight juvenile charges in Los Angeles.

According to the news reports, the six defendants -- ages 17 to 21 -- would break into homes between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m., knocking on a door or ringing a doorbell to see if someone was home. If they were home, the suspects would make up a name and say they were looking for a friend. If the residents weren't home, they would enter through an unlocked window, sliding door or dog door.

Police told the newspaper the group targeted homes above Poli Street as well as midtown near the beach in Clearview and Bayshore. Police said they began investigating after seeing a 40 percent increase in the number of daytime residential burglaries reported citywide. Recently, police caught three of the suspects in the act. Police said the group had been committing the burglaries since 2008.

But what it appears the story didn't say is how police linked all five suspects to these crimes or how they were able to say these five individuals committed 300 to 500 burglaries, which seems nearly impossible to actually prove.

What is important in any case, especially those involving juveniles, is not to give the police any statements if you are accused of a crime. Police are allowed to lie to suspects, so sometimes they tell them their co-defendants have already told them all the details, so it would be best if they confess, too. Sometimes officers will tell suspects they will put in a good word or talk with the district attorney about working out a deal, but most times the officers have no power or sway to help the suspects. These are tactics that officers use to get confessions.

Juveniles can be particularly susceptible to these tactics because they are scared, feel alone and worry about what the possible penalties can mean to their future. In California, nearly 15 percent of people arrested are juveniles, accounting for more than 225,000 arrests each year. According to the California Department of Justice, in 2009, 59,253 felony offenses were filed in juvenile court and 39 percent were for property offenses.

These charges are serious and they must be fought aggressively. Failure to act quickly when a juvenile is arrested could mean time spent incarcerated instead of getting therapy and training to not commit the crime in the future. It could mean the difference between keeping the charges hidden on their criminal record as a juvenile and being subjected to public record laws as an adult charged with a crime.

Continue reading "Ventura Teens Charged With Connection to 300-500 Residential Burglaries" »

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals which has jurisdiction over much of the West Coast of the United States including Los Angeles County has ruled that strip-searches of incoming jail inmates are constitutional and necessary to prevent the smuggling of drugs and other forbidden items into lockup facilities.

This decision comes on the heels of a 2008 Ninth Circuit decision that such searches are so intrusive and dehumanizing that they violate a person's Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable search and seizure unless there is good cause to believe that someone is in possession of contraband.

The ruling is the result of a class-action lawsuit brought by nine antiwar protester against San Francisco arising out of their arrests at a 2002 demonstration.

Judge Sandra S. Ikuta attempted to justified the ruling by stating that the strip-search policy was "reasonable under the Fourth Amendment" as such searches resulted in hundreds of instances where money, drugs, and weapons were seized and that such items can jeopardize the safety of jail staff as well as other inmates.

Judge Sidney R. Thomas was joined by three other judges on the panel in his dissenting opinion. In his opinion Thomas stated that one of the plaintiffs had been arrested at a peaceful protest, slammed to a concrete floor during booking, stripped and subjected to a body-cavity search, then left naked in a cell for eleven hours. She was subsequently strip-searched a second time and then released without charges.

Thomas had ruled in 2008 that without probable cause such searches cannot be upheld as "the intrusiveness of body-cavity searches cannot be overstated."

While one's Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable search and seizure may be somewhat diminished in a lockup facility, in an automobile, or even in a school setting, under most circumstances, one cannot be detained or searched without ...

Continue reading "Strip-Searches of Incoming Jail Inmates Ruled Constitutional by Ninth Circuit" »

After pleading to one felony count of grand theft and one felony count of possession of methamphetamine, former three year veteran of the Glendora Police Department, Timothy Radogna, 34 received a 180 day jail sentence handed down by Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Craig Richman. He also received three years of felony probation, and was ordered to take part in a 24 month drug rehab program and pay $500 in restitution to the Glendora Police Department, according to the Los Angeles County District Attorney's office.

Under California Health and Safety Code Section 11377, Possession of Methamphetamine, the law provides for up to three years in state prison. This charge is what is known as a wobbler, meaning that it can be charged as felony or a misdemeanor. As a misdemeanor charge, it carries up to one year in county jail. In some instances, a defendant in California may be eligible for alternative sentencing when faced with this charge. Such sentencing known as either the Proposition 36 program or the PC-1000 program requires the defendant to undergo drug treatment and drug education for a proscribed period of time. If the defendant successfully completes the program, the drug charge is ultimately dismissed. In this case, Radogna would not be eligible for most forms of alternative sentencing because he is charged with the non-drug related charge of Grand Theft along with Possession of Methamphetamine.

Under California Penal Code Section 487, Grand Theft, the law provides for up to three years in state prison. This charge is a felony. Grand Theft is theft of property or services, the value of which exceeds $400.

Continue reading "Plea Entered by Former Glendora Police Officer in Methamphetamine Possession, Grand Theft Case" »