Trusted Criminal Defense Attorneys In Southern California
I agree to receive promotional content and notifications from Manshoory Law Group through email or text message. For further details, kindly refer to our Privacy Policy.
The Federal Controlled Substances Act, established in 1970, categorized drugs into five distinct schedules to streamline legal enforcement and regulatory measures across the United States. These schedules rank substances based on their accepted medical use, potential for abuse, and the likelihood of dependency.
Schedule 3 drugs, recognized for having a moderate to low potential for physical and psychological dependence, still pose significant legal risks. This article delves into the specifics of Schedule III drugs, exploring their legal implications, including the consequences of possession or trafficking charges and the steps one should take if facing such accusations.
What is the Scheduling System for Drugs?
Although Schedule III drug charges aren’t as serious as Schedule I[1] and II crimes, the outcome of your case will have a significant effect on your future. A federal law, enacted in 1970, The Federal Controlled Substances Act[2] classifies controlled substances (drugs) under a single law replacing an assortment of laws that had developed over time. Five separate categories were created by this law.
When classifying a drug, the first step is determining whether or not there are medical uses for the drug, and the second is the drug’s potential negative effect on mental or physical health, including the potential for addiction. The Federal Drug Scheduling System[3] classifies drugs according to how harmful they are and includes Schedule I, II, III, IV, and V. Schedule I is the most harmful and Schedule V has the lowest risk of abuse.
What are Schedule 3 drugs?
California follows the Federal Schedule for listed drugs in California Health and Safety Code § 11056[4] although California refers to them as C-III drugs. Schedule III drugs include narcotics and non-narcotics. Drugs included in the list[5] of Schedule III drugs include narcotics that contain no more than 90 milligrams of codeine per dose.
Examples of Schedule III drugs include:
Dronabinol
Suboxone
Tylenol with codeine
Vicodin
Non-narcotics on the list of Schedule III drugs include:
Anabolic steroids
Ketamine
Benzphetamine
Marinol – a synthetic version of THC
Phendimetrazine
When determining which drugs will be Schedule III drugs, the risk of dependence is considered. Drugs with a moderate or low risk of physical dependence that have a high risk of psychological dependence may be classified as Schedule 3 drugs. They also have a potential for abuse, but that potential is less than drugs classified as Schedule I or II drugs.
The penalties for a Schedule 3 drug charge depend on whether the charge relates to simple drug possession[7] or trafficking.
Civil Penalties
Possession can be charged in two ways. The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988, Public Law. 100-690[8], contains “User Accountability” requirements for the possession of personal use quantities of illegal drugs. The law is codified at 21 U.S.C. § 844a.
In addition to potential criminal penalties, the “User Accountability” law holds users personally accountable by imposing civil penalties. Individuals convicted of possession of a Schedule 3 drug can also be denied public housing assistance and student loans. In some cases, prosecutors will use this law to punish minor drug offenders but don’t leave them with the stain of a criminal record that can impede their ability to support themselves or their families.
The fine can be up to $10,000, but the individual’s income and assets are considered, so it doesn’t burden poor people with impossible fines.
The public record can be destroyed for first offenders who meet the requirements of paying their fine, not being convicted of a crime during the following three years, and passing a drug test. Individuals with prior drug convictions and those who have taken advantage of this provision twice before are not eligible.
Criminal Penalties
Drug possession is also subject to criminal penalties that vary based on the quantity of drugs the person is found in possession of and their criminal history.
First offenders are usually looking at a maximum of 1-year and a fine of up to $1,000.
A second offense requires a minimum sentence of 15 days with a 2-year maximum and a fine of up to $2,500.
The third offense requires a minimum sentence of not less than 90 days and not more than 3-years and up the fine to a minimum of $5,000.
Any offense involving Flunitrazepam has a fine of up to $250,000 and up to 3 years in prison.
Minimum sentences may not be suspended or deferred.
Trafficking
Offenders guilty of trafficking illegal drugs are subject to stiffer penalties outlined in the DEA Enforcement Guide[9].
First offenders may not be sentenced to more than 10 years unless their crime caused serious injury or death, in which case the maximum is 15 years. The individual fine can’t be more than half a million, but if a company is involved, it increases to $2.5 million. The potential penalties and fines double for second offenses.
What to Do If You Have Been Charged with Possession of a Schedule III Drug?
If you are charged with any crime involving Class III drugs, you need a drug crime attorney to represent you and help you fight the accusations. Your personal freedom, finances, and your future depend on the outcome of the case.
Protective orders and restraining orders are similar in that they are intended to protect an individual from the harmful conduct of another, but in California, they serve different purposes. Many people use the terms protective order and restraining order interchangeably, yet the two orders are different, separate, and distinct in the law in both criminal and civil matters.
If you or your loved ones must be kept safe from someone else, you might need a protective or restraining order as per your circumstances.
Criminal vs. Civil Orders
The first and main difference between protective order vs restraining order lies in the legal context[1] in which they are derived.
Protective orders are issued by criminal cases and have to do mostly with domestic violence and other related forms of abuse and are enforced by the prosecution.
On the other hand, restraining orders are filed in civil court and can be used in harassment, stalking, or disputes between individuals who do not have a close relationship.
Both orders can severely limit contact, communication, or physical proximity between individuals, but the legal process to obtain and enforce them is different.
What is a Protective Order?
A protective order in California is a court-issued directive designed to prevent harm or threat from an individual, often in situations involving domestic violence cases, abuse, or criminal activity. These orders are typically part of a criminal case[2], ensuring that the accused cannot contact or set about protecting mortals.
Such orders may be made out at different levels of legal proceedings, such as during an investigation or after a conviction, depending on the severity of the threat posed.
California law provides various forms or types[3]of protective orders, including emergency protective orders, which law enforcement policemen can receive to provide prompt protection, and temporary protective orders which remain in place until a formal hearing is conducted.
What is a Restriction Order?
Restraining order is a court order that legally restrains a person from approaching, threatening, harassing, or engaging in any violent act against another person. Such an order can come from a broader set of circumstances, as opposed to a protective order, which must be obtained through civil court.
A restraining order in California is divided into several categories. These include:
Domestic violencerestraining orders protect against abuse by a spouse, former partner, or family member.
Civil harassment restraining orders[4]apply when the restrained person is not a close family member but presents a threat through continuing harassment or threats.
Protective Order vs Restraining Order: Application Process and Requirements
The process of receiving a protective order is different. Subsequently, law enforcement officers and prosecutors almost always petition for criminal protective orders in such cases of domestic violence or threats. These orders are, as a result, issued most of the time automatically when such a case appears before a criminal court.
On the other hand, restraining orders require the person seeking protection to file a petition[5] in civil court. The petitioner must present evidence of harassment, abuse, or threats and appear before the court. If the judge believes the claims are valid, a temporary restraining order may be issued until a formal hearing determines whether a long-term order is needed.
Duration of Protective Order and Restraining Order in California
In California, theduration of protective[6] order vs restraining ordersvaries based on the type of order:
Emergency Protective Orders (EPOs): These are issued by law enforcement and usually last up to 7 calendar days.
Temporary Restraining Orders (TROs): Such orders last until the court hearing, usually within 20-25 days.
Restraining Orders After Hearing: These can stay up to 5 years. If no end date is specified, the last 3 years can be extended.
Violating A Restraining Order or Protective Order in California
Violating a protective or restraining order in California is a serious offense with significant consequences. The following are the principal points:
Misdemeanor Violation: Violation of a restriction order is usually a misdemeanor punishable by a fine, probation, and/or jail time. The consequences may be up to 1 year in the county jail and a fine of up to $1,000[7].
Felony Violation: If the violation involves violence, threats of violence, or injury, or if you have previous convictions for violating restraining orders. Violation punishments such as felonies can extend to 3 years in jail or prison and a fine of up to $1,000.
Protective Order vs Restraining Order: Can They Be Modified or Extended?
Under some conditions, protective and restraining orders can be changed or extended. If the situation changes, a party may seek a modification of the order so that the terms of the order are changed. This may mean changing restrictions in place on contact, residence, or communication.
For those who want to be protected further, restriction orders can be extended beyond the date of their expiration. The application for extension must be filed before the current order expires, andthe petitioner must show a continued threat or risk. The court will consider the need to extend the order based on the evidence presented.
How to Fight a Protective Order or Restriction Order in California?
If you believe the court order is unjust or unjustified, then you can appeal. Here is how you do it:
Gather Evidence: Collect all evidence that proves that the allegations brought against you are false or overstated.
Follow the Court Order Until the Hearing: Even if you believe the order is unfair, violating it before your court date can lead to criminal charges. Strictly comply with all terms, including no-contact provisions, stay-away distances, and firearm restrictions.
File a Response (Form DV-120 for Domestic Violence Cases): If you receive a Domestic Violence Restraining Order (DVRO)[8], you should file a Response to Request for Domestic Violence Restraining Order (DV-120) before your court hearing.
Knowing the difference between protective and restraining orders allows individuals to make good decisions. Although both are safety orders, their application, duration, and enforcement are totally different.
Cannabis cultivation isillegal in California. There are a lot of people doing cannabis cultivation, but most of them are legally allowed to do so.
Many of you are probably wondering why the law favors a few individuals while they are punishing other people for marijuana cultivation. Marijuana can be considered a type of drug, and it can be used as a medication for certain diseases like AIDS, cancer, seizures, and more.
Cannabis growing laws in California are very strict[1] and if you are found guilty, you might face jail time and a fine. If you are thinking about cannabis cultivation, here are a few things that you should know about the laws in California.
Can you Legally Grow Marijuana in California?
Marijuana cultivation is more or less the growing of marijuana. In most places around the globe, growing marijuana is illegal. However, in some parts of the United States, you are given a cannabis cultivation license to legally grow cannabis.
California is loosening up its restrictions when it comes to cannabis cultivation. Although growing cannabis is still a serious offense, there are several ways in which you will be allowed to grow marijuana without breaking any laws.
In the past, you could only grow marijuana for medical purposes, but under Proposition 64[2], people living in California can now grow cannabis for recreational purposes.
California Cannabis Growing Laws
Under Proposition 64, drug cultivation for recreational use is legal[3], but there are restrictions on who can grow the plant and the amount that can be cultivated.
It will only be legal if both of the following statements are true:
The marijuana cultivator is 21 years or older
He/she cultivates no more than six cannabis plants.
Aside from these two, there are certain restrictions placed to make sure that they won’t go overboard. The cultivator needs to follow local ordinances placed by the city and they can only grow up to six weed plants in a single residence.
It means that even if you are living with your partner in a private residence, you can only grow up to six plants. In general, you can only grow weed indoors or within your private property. You can only do so in a locked space or in any area that is not visible to the public.
Penalties for Illegally Cultivating Cannabis
For marijuana cultivation, penalties for growing weed illegally can be divided into three:
Infraction: You will be given an infraction if[4] you are between 18 to 20 years old and you are growing weed in your house. It is punishable by a fine of $100.
Misdemeanor: You will be charged with a misdemeanor if you are 21 years or older and you are growing more than six plants. You might be put into custody in the county jail for up to six months or receive a fine of up to $500.
Felony:You will be charged with a felony when you are cultivating more than six plants and you are guilty of one of the following:
Violated environmental laws on cultivating marijuana
The penalty for a felony[6] is up to three years in jail and a fine of $10,000. There is also a marijuana law on possession and sale. You are only allowed to possess up to one ounce of dried marijuana or eight grams of concentrated cannabis.
You need a cannabis cultivation license if you want to be a seller of marijuana. It means that it is illegal to sell weed if you don’t have a license to do it. You are only allowed to grow your weed, but you are not allowed to sell it. You cannot give it to minors as well.
Growing and using marijuana for recreational purposes has become legal in some states, but they are still regulating it to make sure that the users won’t get too addicted. If you are penalized for growing marijuana, you can always get the best criminal defense lawyers in Los Angeles that would represent you in court.These professionals can also help you understand what you need to know to grow marijuana legally in your area.
What are the Defenses of the Unlawful Cultivation of Cannabis?
The following defenses are available to individuals charged with cultivating greater than six cannabis plants:
The cannabis belonged to another individual;
The defendant was not aware that the cannabis was where it was found;
The defendant was not aware that the cannabis was, in fact, cannabis;
The defendant is a licensed medical cannabis user whose medical needs require him/her to cultivate more marijuana than California law otherwise allows; or
If you have been charged with unlawful cultivation of cannabis, and you believe you are within one or more of the above-listed exemptions, contact the Manshoory Law Group as soon as possible.
The attorneys at Manshoory Law Group have extensive knowledge of and experience in the ever-changing area of drug law, and we will ensure that you are provided with an effective and aggressive defense so that you have the best possible opportunity at defending the charges asserted against you.
The insanity defense has sparked debates and confusion in criminal law. When defendants claim they’re not guilty because they were insane, they’re saying they couldn’t tell right from wrong when they broke the law. But proving insanity in court isn’t easy. It needs both legal and medical experts to weigh in.
Understanding “Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity”: What is Insanity Plea?
An insanity plea is a legal strategy[1] used in criminal cases[2]. The defendant uses this theory to say that they were not in control of their actions or mind due to a severe mental disorder. This means that they should not be blamed for the crime. It is different from the competency to stand trial[3], which is a determination of whether someone can take part in a trial. Being fit to stand trial checks if someone can take part in court. The insanity defense, however, looks at the person’s state of mind when they broke the law.
Legal Standard for Insanity Defense
Some legal standards help to determine criminal insanity in US courts. These are:
M’naghten Rule[4]: This rule determines whether the defendants were not able to distinguish right from wrong due to mental illness or deficiencies. The courts could consider a person legally insane if they couldn’t understand what they were doing or if it was wrong.
Model Penal Code’s standard for the insanity defense: This standard looks at “substantial capacity” – if the defendant could know or understand his actions or handle his behavior due to mental illness. Some states use a version of this test called the irresistible impulse test[5], which determines whether a defendant could control their actions despite knowing they were wrong.
Process of Proving Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity
Successfully claiming to protect an insanity defense involves a rigorous legal and medical procedure. Here are the major stages:
Proof of evidence: In most places, defense has the responsibility to show that the defendant was not guilty due to insanity when crime happened. Some states require “clear and concrete evidence”, while others use the “pre -evidence of evidence” standard.
Testing proceedings: Health professional experts act as witnesses and talk about the mental state of the defendant during the trial. The prosecution often argues that the defendants meant to commit a crime and knew what they were doing.
Plea of insanity: The defense lawyer should raise the argument of an insanity plea at the initial stage of the legal process, usually during the prosecution.
Psychiatry test: The accused should conduct several psychiatric tests to investigate whether they are insane. A forensic psychologist[6] or psychiatrist does this test.
What Happens After a Successful Insanity Defense?
When a defendant is found not guilty because of insanity, he or she does not walk free; normally, they are committed to a mental institution for proper medical treatment. Confinement duration may depend on the level of their condition and according to state regulations.
Hospitalization and Treatment: A defendant will receive psychiatric care for proper treatment and monitoring.
Periodic Reviews: Courts check the mental status of the accused periodically and then determine if they are still dangerous to society.
Potential Release: If the court and mental health professionals determine that the accused is no longer a danger to society, they may be released conditionally or fully.
In some cases, a defendant may spend more time in a mental institution than they would have if they were convicted and sentenced to prison.
Legal Representation in Verdicts of Not Guilty by Reason of insanity
The not-guilty-by-reason-of-insanity verdict case requires professional legal services. An experienced criminal defense attorney helps to develop a solid defense through medical evidence, psychiatric expert involvement, and powerful arguments in court. As laws on insanity defense differ from state to state, legal advice is given to the case to make sure it is in accordance with the jurisdictional requirements and standards.
A professional lawyer also assists defendants in navigating the legal process from pre-trial evaluations to post-trial commitments, fighting for fair treatment. Selecting a lawyer who is experienced in mental health law can significantly improve the likelihood of an effective defense and ensure the defendant receives appropriate care rather than punitive treatment.
Proving not guilty by reason of insanity is a challenging legal battle requiring substantial evidence, psychiatric evaluations, and skilled legal representation. While it can offer an alternative to traditional criminal punishment, it often results in long-term psychiatric treatment rather than complete freedom.
If you or someone you know is facing this situation, seeking a qualified attorney is essential. Contact Manshoory Law Group to schedule your consultation today!
Arson in California has become a pressing concern for law enforcement and communities. As devastating blazes continue to sweep through Southern California, authorities face challenges in determining whether fires are deliberately set or occur naturally. Recent incidents, including the Palisades Fire in Los Angeles[1], underscore the importance of understanding the legal framework surrounding arson charges and prosecution.
What is Arson Under California Law?
California law defines[2] arson as starting fires with malicious intent on buildings, forests, or other properties. The Eaton fires[3] in California arson cases are prosecuted under Penal Code 451 and 452, distinguishing between malicious and reckless burning. To successfully prosecute an arson case, law enforcement agencies in Los Angeles and beyond must establish intent and demonstrate that the fire was deliberately set.
Additionally, the investigation of arson in California fire cases presents distinct problems in Los Angeles County due to the city’s unusual combination of urban areas and natural wilderness spaces. The County District Attorney’s office needs to study all the facts to decide if fires were intentionally set or if they appeared naturally.
How Arson Contributes To California Fires?
Natural conditions like dry weather, wind, and dense vegetation make California particularly vulnerable to wildfires. The effects of fires in California arson become deadly when someone decides to start them on purpose. The Palisades Fire demonstrated how human actions can exacerbate wildfire disasters, which destroyed thousands in a single incident.
The Los Angeles Police and Fire departments and other local agencies dedicate significant resources to tracing the sources of wildfires. However, “there is no data supporting winds bringing out arsonists,”[4]a former detective with the L.A. County Sheriff’s Office said. According to the National Interagency Fire Center, arson may account for over 20% of human-caused wildland fires. However, the actual figure remains uncertain, as arson cases are often misclassified initially and may take time to be properly identified.
Legal Penalties for Arson in California
There are severe penalties for arson in California fires, reflecting the devastating impact these crimes can have on lives and property.
Convictions depend on several factors:
Type of Arson: Whether someone started the firesdeliberately or without care.
Injuries or Fatalities: Fires resulting in bodily harm or death carry harsher sentences
Extent of Damage: Significant property loss or damage to essential infrastructure influences sentencing.
Under Section 451, penalties may include:
If someone commits arson that results in great bodily injury, it’s considered a felony[5] and can lead to imprisonment forfive, seven, or nine years in state prison.
If the fire causes an inhabited structure (like a home) or inhabited property to burn, that’s also a felony, with a potential prison time of three, five, or eight years.
Setting fire to a structure or forest land can result in a felony charge as well, with prison sentences ranging from two to six years.
Lastly, if someone commits arson targeting tangible property, it’s another felony that could lead to 16 months to three years in prison.
Defenses to Arson Charges in California
Lack of Intent: The intent in setting a fire must be deliberate and malicious because arson does not include actions performed without intent. This may be a strong defense claim if a fire was started without intent.
Case of Mistaken Identity: This may be a defense plan strategy when there is not enough evidence to show that the accusation made against is true.
Not Enough Evidence: The prosecution must prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, if the evidence presented against the defendant is weak or circumstantial, this factor may be raised.
Alibi: If the accused can prove they were elsewhere when the fire occurred, this can be a defense.
False Accusation: Certain individuals may have been arsonists only to be charged with arson assaults themselves because of misunderstanding.
Investigations and Evidence in Arson Cases
An investigation of the fire is also referred to as an arson investigation, the focus of which is to determine the fire’s origin and cause[6], with the ultimate aim of understanding its purpose. When foul play is suspected, investigators prioritize gathering evidence to identify the arsonist and build a strong case for prosecution.
An arson investigation is often intricate and involves the collaboration of several specialists. Proper understanding of the science in regards to fire, ranging from where it starts to how it can engulf a certain level of area, is a must for fire investigators.
Evidence in Arson Prosecutions
Evidence in arson cases[7] is essential to prove guilt. Generally, it encompasses both physical evidence that can be obtained from the fire scene, such as accelerants, peculiar burn patterns, etc., and circumstantial evidence that may relate to the defendant’s motive or opportunity.
Proper collection and preservation of the evidence make sure that they are admissible in court, which involves adhering to legal standards, maintaining a chain of custody, and protecting the rights of the accused.
The Role of Climate in Arson Charges
As climate change continues to reshape California’s landscape and weather patterns[8], its impact extends beyond environmental concerns into the legal realm, particularly regarding arson cases.
The intersection of climate conditions and fire-related crimes has created new challenges for both law enforcement and the judicial system, leading to several key considerations:
Increased Fire Risk: Rising temperatures and prolonged droughts create conditions where fires can easily ignite and spread, meaning even small acts of arson can result in major wildfires.
Severity of Fires: Fires are becoming more intense, with incidents like the Park Fire in 2024[9], linked to arson, burning 429,603 acres, and becoming one of the largest in California’s history.
Legal Implications: California’s arson laws factor in intent and damage. As climate change worsens fire conditions, the penalties for arson can be even harsher.
Steps to Take if Accused of Arson
Individuals charged with arson in Southern California should act quickly to protect their legal rights:
Hire a county district attorney who has experience in handling arson cases.
As California faces severe wildfires, understanding arson laws is pivotal. Prosecuting arson cases requires balancing strict enforcement with consideration of environmental factors. It’s essential to hold accountable those who deliberately start fires while proving these cases beyond a reasonable doubt.
In Southern California, especially Los Angeles County, ongoing cooperation among law enforcement, fire investigators, and the legal system is paramount. With climate conditions promoting fire spread, preventing and prosecuting arson is vital for protecting lives and property statewide.
California does have the death penalty as part of its legal system. However, its implementation has been anything but straightforward, influenced by complex legal battles and shifting public opinion over the years. While the death penalty remains in place in California, recent procedural changes have significantly shaped its application.
What is the Death Penalty?
Capital punishment or the death penalty, is a juridical sentence[1], a type of punishment, according to which an offender is executed by the state. The death penalty in California has been practiced right from when the state was formed in 1851. It has been shifted through a number of legislative amendments as well as undergone subsequent voters’ votes due to the changes in the people’s perception of capital punishment.
Does California Have the Death Penalty? History of the Death Penalty in California
California’s history with the death penalty is marked by numerous legal battles and public discourse[2]. The state reinstated capital punishment in California in 1978 after a brief moratorium, leading to a surge in death sentences. However, this surge was accompanied by growing concerns aboutwrongful convictions and racial disparities in sentencing.
Understanding Proposition 34
In 2012, California voters faced Proposition 34[3], which sought to abolish the death penalty and replace it with life imprisonment without parole. The proposition was narrowly defeated, with approximately 48% voting for abolition. This outcome demonstrated that while there is significant support for reforming capital punishment, many Californians still believe in its necessity.
Understanding Proposition 62
Proposition 62[4] was another attempt to abolish the death penalty, appearing on the ballot in 2016. Like its predecessor, it aimed to replace capital punishment with life imprisonment without parole. However, it was also defeated by a margin of about 54% against. This repeated rejection of abolition efforts highlights the complexity of public opinion regarding capital punishment in California.
Understanding Proposition 66
In contrast to Propositions 34 and 62, Proposition 66 aimed to expedite the appeals process for death penalty cases while maintaining capital punishment as an option. Passed by voters in November 2016, this measure sought to address concerns about lengthy delays in executing death sentences. Proposition 66[5] reflects a desire among some voters to reform rather than eliminate the death penalty in California.
California Death Penalty Laws
The California death penalty laws are provided under various California Penal Codes. The main law governing capital punishment is in Penal Code Section 190[6] which deals with association and capital crimes and the procedure for arriving at the punishment.
A number of criminal activities commonly attract the death penalty:
First-degree murder[7] is accompanied by special circumstances like causing the death of many people, or killing a police officer or a person during particular other crimes like robbery[8], rape, and others.
After conviction, the defendants undergo another procedure to come up with the verdict to either set a death penalty or life imprisonment without eligibility for parole.
The death penalty in California is a legal procedure and involves a number of steps and appeal and review phases. Each defendant given a death penalty has the right to appeal convictions and the corresponding penalties through various other state and federal courts. This long process may at times take several years or even decades before an execution can be affected.
Moratorium on Executions in California
In the same month of March 2019, Governor Gavin Newsomsigned an executive order[9] that halted executions in California. This order stopped all executions while serving as the governor and demanded the shutdown of the execution chamber in the San Quentin State Pen. Although this moratorium does not eliminate the death penalty itself, it influences its application in very many ways.
The hope is that the moratorium is in response to mounting concerns regarding equity and efficiency of applying the capital penalty under the criminal justice system of California[10].
Critics have continued to observe that race and geography are skewed in California death penalty cases, resulting in an overrepresentation of minority populations and geographical areas dominated by people of color.
For instance, studies indicated[11] that African American defendants were more likely to be sentenced to death if they kill whites than if they kill people of other colors.
Statistics on the California Death Penalty
As of late 2024, there are approximately 700 inmates[12]on California’s death row, making it one of the largest death row populations in the United States. Execution statistics reveal that California has not carried out an execution since January 2017 due to Governor Newsom’s moratorium. Furthermore, there have been significant concerns regarding wrongful convictions; at least 235 individuals[13] on California’s death row have had their judgments reversed since 1989.
Racial disparities continue to be a pressing issue within capital punishment cases. Research indicates that black defendants are disproportionately sentenced to death compared to their white counterparts. Such disparities raise ethical questions about fairness in sentencing practices and highlight systemic issues within California’s criminal justice system.
The debate[14] about the morality and efficacy of the California death penalty continues. Though capital punishment has not been outlawed in California, recent advancements show that authorities, like Governor Newsom, are trying to reconsider the position of capital punishment in the state.
If Californians keep changing their views on capital punishment, future laws may alter how it is applied or even abolish it entirely. For those interested in criminal justice reform or the moral and legal issues surrounding state executions, understanding this situation is important.
If anyone wants to advocate for their rights, needs legal advice, or requires a lawyer for criminal cases, including capital offenses, it’s best to consult experienced criminal defense attorneys.
For further information on criminal defense issues or consultation from an experienced Los Angeles criminal defense attorney, please visit or contact Manshoory Law.
Picture this: You’re late for a meeting in downtown Los Angeles, and the nearest crosswalk is half a block away. For decades, navigating the streets could mean a big ticket. However, that’s about to change with recent changes to California’s jaywalking law.
In 2023, the Golden State introduced the Freedom to Walk Act[1], which changed the rules for pedestrians. This law focuses on practical safety over strict rules. This blog covers practical safety considerations for residents and visitors while identifying new legal developments in California’s jaywalking laws.
What is Jaywalking?
Jaywalking means crossing the streetoutside a marked crosswalk or violating traffic signals. This is considered a minor violation, but walking across the road poses significant risks, such as collisions with vehicles. Jaywalking laws vary from state to state. Understanding these laws is important to pedestrian safety and legal compliance. The California jaywalking law has changed significantly in recent years. This reflects a shift in public perception and the focus of law enforcement.
The word jaywalking is often used to define these types of behaviors:
Crossing the street outside of a designated crosswalk
Crossing the street where there is no crosswalk available
Crossing the street where there is no intersection
Ignoring signs that instruct pedestrians not to cross
Disregarding signals that indicate “Don’t Walk!”
California Jaywalking Law: A Historical Overview
The evolution of jaywalking law in California has been remarkable. The term [2] jaywalking emerged in the 1920s as automobiles became more common. This led to an increase in collisions between pedestrians and vehicles. The automotive industry played a key role in promoting the concept of jaywalking to shift blame for crashes from drivers to pedestrians.
A few years back, California’s jaywalking law imposed restrictions on jaywalking and punished offenders. However, these laws have some problems and enforcement is often unfair. As of January 1, 2023, police officers can no longer stop pedestrians under the Freedom to Walk Act unless their actions create danger [3].
Policymakers and advocates supported the new law with data showing that jaywalking citations disproportionately affected low-income and minority communities, often leading to unnecessary fines and negative interactions with law enforcement. By decriminalizing safe mid-block crossings, the Freedom to Walk Act aims to reduce these disparities while maintaining pedestrian safety by allowing enforcement only when a pedestrian’s actions create an immediate danger.
Is Jaywalking Legal in California? Recent Changes in California Jaywalking Law
The way Californians consider jaywalking has changed significantly since the Freedom to Walk Act took effect on January 1, 2023. This new jaywalking California law has altered how jaywalking is handled legally.
Now, under the Freedom to Walk Act:
You cannot receive a ticket for crossing the street unless you are in a situation where you are at risk of being hit by a car.
Police officers must consider a pedestrian a safety risk before deciding to issue a citation.
This change reflects a broader understanding that old and strict rules about crossing the street often do more harm than good. This is especially true in places where there aren’t enough zebra crossings or pedestrian-friendly roads.
To learn more about the legality of jaywalking, watch the video from our lawyer.
Tips for Pedestrians to Stay Safe and Legal
If you want to travel safely and legally in California with the new jaywalking California law, consider the tips below:
Always use marked crosswalks when available.
Pay attention to traffic lights and avoid crossing when the light turns red.
Make sure you don’t risk colliding with oncoming vehicles by crossing the road.
Be especially careful in areas where there are no crosswalks or proper signage.
Take into account local regulations. This is because some cities may have additional rules regarding pedestrian behavior.
Penalties for Jaywalking in California: Fine for a VC 21955 Ticket
The Freedom to Walk Act has decriminalized aspects of jaywalking law in California, infractions under Vehicle Code 21955[4]may still carry penalties when they involve reckless behaviorv[5]. Here are examples:
Pedestrians who cross streets in a manner that creates an immediate danger of collision may be subject to fines of up to $250.
Repeat offenders may suffer additional penalties, though enforcement is less punishing.
Note that the fines are usually jurisdiction-dependent and thus might differ according to the policies implemented by local governments. Pedestrians cited for jaywalking hire lawyers who would defend their rights or clear the confusion over their offenses.When pedestrian violations have become a cause of concern and may lead to court cases, a Los Angeles DUI lawyer can be a helpful guide.
Safety Concerns and Public Perception
The discussion over California Jaywalking laws reflects larger worries about pedestrian infrastructure and public safety. Others, however, worry that passing the Freedom to Walk Act could backfire, leading to more unsafe behaviors when crossing.
Key safety concerns include:
Insufficient marked crossings in pedestrian-heavy zones.
Lack of sufficient education on safe street-crossing practices.
Cities with heavy traffic volumes are more prone to accidents involving pedestrians.
Public perception about jaywalking laws in California has also changed. Many Californians now see such laws as old-fashioned relics that do not make sense in modern urban living. Meanwhile, advocacy groups are more concerned with personal responsibility inmaintaining pedestrian and driver safety. If awareness is built and responsible behavior is encouraged, it’s possible to balance pedestrian rights and road safety.
The jaywalking law in California has evolved to mirror changing attitudes toward pedestrian rights and safety. It grants pedestrians greater freedom while emphasizing the importance of responsible behavior to prevent accidents and maintain order.
Understanding California’s jaywalking law enables pedestrians to cross urban areas more confidently, safely, and lawfully.
Choose professional services like a Los Angeles DUI lawyer for legal advice on traffic-related issues.
California is famous for its golden beaches, sprawling metropolises, and iconic landmarks; but it also has a less glamorous side: crime. California is home to plenty of safe havens, but there are also cities with the highest crime rates that are notorious for both preventing and committing crimes. From violent offenses like robbery and aggravated assault to widespread property crimes, many cities in CA face ongoing challenges that impact residents and law enforcement alike.
Overview of Crime in California
California’s crime landscape is so complex, with major variations in violent and property crime rates across various regions. Most of the cities in California that have the highest crime rates in the state have statistics that exceed the national average, especially in categories like robbery[1]
and aggravated assault. With a total population of 40 million residents, California faces different challenges for law enforcement and community safety initiatives.
The Most Dangerous Cities in California
Let’s take a closer look at the cities with the highest crime rates, ranked based on their violent crime rates and overall safety concerns.
Commerce, CA
Commerce, a small city with around 13,000 residents, has become one of the most dangerous in California, facing numerous challenges.
Crime Statistics:
Violent crime rates: This city has a violent crime rate of 38.7[2], which is more than the national average of 22.71. Commerce has been struggling to combat crime and keep its citizens safe.
Property crime rates: The property crime rate in Commerce is 95.4, almost triple the national average of 35.4.
This shows that CAs are at higher risk of being victims of both property and violent crimes.
Contributing Factors:
High concentration of commercial properties
Neighborhood watch programs are fewer residential
Major transportation corridors
Community Policing Strategies:
Patrolling the commercial districts is enhanced
Business security partnership programs
Emeryville, CA
Emeryville’s crime statistics reveal particularly concerning trends for a city of its size:
Crime Statistics:
Violent crime rates: With 11.24 violent crimes per 1,000 residents, property crimes are more prevalent than violent crimes. This report by Emeryville’s police department comparesviolent and property crime rates in November 2024[3] .
Insurance rate increases for commercial properties
Community Policing Strategies:
Implementation of real-time camera systems
Enhanced retail security presence
Oakland, CA
Oakland continues to struggle with persistent crime challenges, showing complex patterns across different neighborhoods:
Crime Statistics:
Violent crime rateս: It is seen that in Oakland violent crimes have decreased overall by 33%[5]as compared to past years. This includes a 17% drop in homicides and a 21% decrease in assaults and other crimes.
Robberies: This has increased by 11% in Oakland, with residential robberies spiking by 118%. A recent report indicates that over 1,000 robberies were reported within the first quarter of 2024.
Vallejo’s crime landscape reveals significant challenges that affect community safety:
Crime Statistics:
Violent crime: This crime rate is approximately 1215 per 1,000 residents.
Property crime: A Safe and Sound Security[11]shows that property crime in this city is 9.65 per 1,000 residents.
Contributing Factors:
Budget constraints affecting police staffing
Economic challenges following city bankruptcy
Community Policing Strategies:
Active neighborhood watch programs
Business district security partnerships
Community policing initiatives
Youth engagement programs
Richmond, CA
Richmond faces unique security challenges shaped by its industrial history and urban development:
Crime Statistics:
Violent crime rates: The violent crime rate was approximately 10.6 per 1,000 residents[12] in 2022, 8.3 per 1,000 residents in 2023, and 9.8 per 1,000 residents in 2024.
Property crime rates: A report by the Richmond Police Department shows that property crime in the city was 38.9 per 1,000 residents in 2022, 40.9 per 1,000 residents in 2023, and 41.1 per 1,000 residents in 2024.
Contributing Factors:
Gang activities influencing community safety.
Industrial area security challenges.
Socioeconomic disparities across neighborhoods.
Community Policing Strategies:
Office of Neighborhood Safety (ONS) programs reducing violence.
Ceasefire violence prevention strategies.
Sacramento, CA
As California’s capital city, Sacramento presents a complex crime landscape:
Crime Statistics:
Violent crime rate of approximately 9.08 crime rate[13] (per 1,000 residents).
Property crimes vary significantly by area
Auto theft remains a persistent challenge
Contributing Factors:
Downtown/Midtown experiencing different crime patterns than suburbs
South Sacramento facing unique security challenges
North Sacramento showing improvement through community programs
Community Policing Strategies:
Community engagement through the Police Activities League
Neighborhood impact teams
Business district security partnerships
Modesto, CA
Modesto’s security situation reflects both urban and agricultural community challenges:
Economic Conditions: Large unemployment, poverty, and unstable economic conditions go hand in hand with higher levels of violent crimes. Economic struggles may lead to more stress and desperation, hence leading to committing crimes.
Social Factors: Social inequality, instability in families, and lack of community resources are significant contributors. Areas with social disorganization show higher crime rates.
Cities with the highest crime rates are implementing comprehensive strategies to decrease an alarming number of criminal cases:
Technology Integration:
Real-time crime mapping
Predictive policing tools
Automated license plate readers
Public safety camera networks
Community Engagement:
Neighborhood watch programs
Youth mentorship initiatives
Business safety partnerships
Cultural awareness training
Economic Development:
Job training programs
Small business support
Infrastructure improvements
Educational partnerships
California is a state of contrasts, with thriving communities alongside those facing significant crime challenges. By analyzing the most dangerous cities in California and knowing their unique circumstances, you can better address the root causes of crime. Through collaborative efforts and innovative solutions, a safer future for all Californians is within reach.
We welcome anyone who requires legal representation or consultation about criminal issues or security issues within your community by reaching out to us at Manshoory Law or calling (877) 642-0314
The corpus delicti rule is one of the most important principles of criminal law that helps provide a fair trial, timely and accurate. This rule is particularly important in California because the legal process of the state is based not only on statutory law but also on case law.
What is Corpus Delicti?
The term corpus delicti is derived from Latin, meaning “body of the crime.”[1] It refers to the principle that a crime must be proven to have occurred before an individual can be convicted of committing that crime. The corpus delicti rule serves as a safeguard against wrongful convictions based solely on confessions or admissions, which may be coerced or unreliable.
In essence, corpus delicti requires that there be independent evidence[2] to establish two key components:
An injury or harm: There must be evidence of an injury, loss, or harm to a person or property.
A criminal act: This injury must result from someone’s criminal activity.
The requirement for independent proof ensures that no one can be convicted solely based on their confession; there must be tangible evidence indicating that a crime has indeed occurred.
The Five Elements of Corpus Delicti
To effectively apply the corpus delicti rule in a criminal case, prosecutors must demonstrate five essential elements:
Proof of Injury or Loss: The first element demands contingent loss proof that an injury or loss has taken place. This could be an attack on a person (e.g., an assault on someone) or an attack on an object (e.g., a theft of someone’s property).
Connection to Criminal Activity: The second one requires proving that the given injury or loss occurred as a result of the commission of the crime. For instance, if a person is found dead, proof must be made that they died through the commission of a crime other than death through an accident or as a result of an illness.
Independence from Confessions: Any written record that the defendant may have made or written statements incriminating the defendant is not sufficient to prove the occurrence of the crime by itself. This is important because very often confessions themselves can be wrong: they can be obtained under pressure or as a result of the accused person’s psychological state.
Causation: The harm suffered has to be proved to emanate from the offending action of the defendant. This means proving that the defendant’s conduct was a cause of the injury or loss; however, it need not be the sole cause.
Intent: Although intent is not frequently an essential element for all crimes, proving it would be a strong addition to the prosecution’s argument because it shows that the defendant purposely or knowingly committed a crime.
All these features collectively help ensure that the prosecution constructs steely-handed cases from real evidence, not confessions.
The Corpus Delicti Rule in California
In California, the corpus delicti rule is firmly established within its legal framework. According to California law, particularly under CALCRIM 359[3], prosecutors are required to prove corpus delicti before they can use any confession made by the defendant as evidence in court.
Key Aspects of California’s Application
Independent Evidence Requirement: In practice, this means that even if a defendant confesses to committing a crime[4], the prosecution cannot rely solely on that confession for a conviction. They must present independent evidence showing that a crime occurred and that it was caused by someone’s actions.
Judicial Precedents: California courts have consistently upheld this principle through various rulings. For instance, in People v. McGowan[5], 2004, it was emphasized that confessions cannot substitute for proof of corpus delicti.
Burden of Proof: The burden lies with the prosecution to establish corpus delicti beyond a reasonable doubt before any confessions can be admitted into evidence during trial proceedings.
Types of Evidence That Can Satisfy the Corpus Delicti Rule
To meet the requirements of corpus delicti, prosecutors can utilize various forms of evidence:
Direct Evidence
Hearsay evidence refers to an assertion by a person other than the prisoner that is made to prove the fact in cases where such a fact would have sufficed to prove the crime without inference being drawn. Examples include:
Eyewitness Testimony: Such accident witnesses who fall within the first party of perceived witnesses are ideal because they have a first-hand view of the event.
Video Footage: Videos of the event may be desirable for proving different aspects of vicarious traumatization and may also be adequately distinguished for being direct evidence.
Physical Evidence: Objects that include a tool used in a crime or blood-stained samples that connect a culprit to a bereaved are forms of direct proof.
Circumstantial Evidence
As much as they are indirect, circumstantial evidence is very useful in proving corpus delicti. Such evidence leads to a conclusion without actually observing it but through observation of surrounding facts and circumstances. Examples include:
Behavioral Patterns: That is why the suspect’s behavior before or after the time when the crime was committed may give a clue to the police.
Testimony from Accomplices: Eyewitnesses or persons who have information about matters pertaining to the commission of the crime may always be of significance in putting facts and circumstances leading to the commission of the crime.
Direct and circumstantial evidence are relevant since, in cases of corpus delicti, there is a need to prove the case.
Exceptions to the Corpus Delicti Rule
While the corpus delicti rule is stringent, there are exceptions where certain types of statements may be admissible even without independent corroborating evidence:
Statements Made During Commission of a Crime
If a defendant makes statements while actively committing an offense—such as threats during an assault—these statements may be considered alongside circumstantial evidence to establish corpus delicti.
Testimony from Accomplices
In some cases, testimony from accomplices[8] may help establish corpus delicti when it provides context about how and why certain events transpired. However, such testimony often requires careful scrutiny due to potential biases.
Judicial Discretion
Judges may also exercise discretion regarding what constitutes sufficient proof of corpus delicti based on specific case circumstances. This discretion underscores the importance of legal expertise in navigating complex cases involving this rule.
How Can You Apply the Corpus Delicti Rule?
Understanding how to apply the corpus delicti rule is crucial for both prosecutors and criminal defense attorneys:
For Prosecutors
Prosecutors must gather comprehensive evidence demonstrating both elements of corpusdelicti before relying on confessions during trial proceedings. This involves:
Conducting thorough investigations.
Collecting both direct and circumstantial evidence.
Ensuring all collected evidence aligns with legal standards for admissibility.
For Defense Attorneys
Defense attorneys can leverage their understanding of corpus delicti to challenge prosecutions effectively:
Identifying weaknesses in the prosecution’s case regarding independent proof.
Highlighting any reliance on confessions without sufficient corroborating evidence.
Presenting alternative explanations for circumstantial evidence that may suggest innocence rather than guilt.
By focusing on these strategies, defense attorneys can create reasonable doubt regarding their clients’ involvement in alleged crimes.
The Corpus Delicti Rule is a useful protection in the legal system of California in order to prevent wrongful convictions resulting solely from an admission of guilt. Due to the stipulation that prosecutors must look for other evidence that corroborates a crime before using statements and confessions of the defendant, this rule is a cornerstone of impartiality and justice.
That is why anyone dealing with criminal charges or engaging in criminal cases as a defendant or lawyer should seek legal advice from an experienced criminal defense attorney who will give proper legal counsel on how to overcome all of these properly and efficiently.
Comprehension and numerousness of the allowable tenets concerning corpus delicti can help or hinder the cases and define their outcomes for the benefit of all the participants of the trial.
We use cookies to personalize content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyze our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our advertising and analytics partners who may combine it with other information that you’ve provided to them or that they’ve collected from your use of their services. Agree
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
A few years back, California’s jaywalking law imposed restrictions on jaywalking and punished offenders. However, these laws have some problems and enforcement is often unfair. As of January 1, 2023, police officers can no longer stop pedestrians under the Freedom to Walk Act unless their 
