You don’t have to be a cop, an attorney, or even a pot smoker to know that attitudes towards marijuana in Texas are relatively conservative. Officials see the illegal drug trade as being responsible for crime and immigration issues in the state. But, there are indications that attitudes are changing.

According to The Daily Chronic, 80,000 people are arrested in Texas each year for marijuana crimes. About 97% of those arrests are for possession alone. By lessening the penalties for possession, Texas officials would be better able to focus on things that should concern them more, like violent crimes.

One such bill, HB 184, has passed committee and is headed to legislators. The bill would decrease penalties for first time marijuana offenders under the age of 21. Currently, a first time possession charge of one ounce or less carries a Class B misdemeanor designation and a potential for 180 days in jail and $2,000 in fines. If the law passes, young first time offenders would face a maximum fine of $500 and no jail time.

While it may not seem like much, it’s a step in the right direction.

“While this is a small step in the process of legalization in Texas, it speaks volumes to the winds of change in our state,” said a statement from Texas NORML. “This is an amazing step for Texas.”

On the medical marijuana front, House Bill 594 was set to be voted on in committee this week. While the Texas legislature hasn’t updated its status, there are indications it was allowed to die. Still, it’s presence and it’s support could indicate changing tides.

The bill would have allowed people facing marijuana charges to use a medical condition and doctor’s recommendation as a defense against that charge. In other words, if you use marijuana for disease or illness treatment, and your doctor recommends it, that could help you get any resulting criminal charges dismissed in court.

When it comes to policies that lessen crime penalties for any offense, Texas is often a little behind. But progress is progress and these two bills could signal changes yet to come.

Lehmberg was just arrested for drunk driving last weekend, and less than a week later she has leaded guilty and been sentenced, a process that usually takes weeks or even months.

District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg

According to initial reports after her arrest, concerned citizens phoned law enforcement when they saw a Lexus weaving in and out of its lane late Friday night. Lehmberg was found sitting in her vehicle in a church parking lot, intoxicated with an open bottle of vodka by her side.

In the days following her arrest, details were extremely limited, far scarcer than they would be if she was just some woman off the streets. Arresting officers offered conflicting information on her demeanor at the time of arrest, calling her cooperative but cocky and insulting too. But those officers may have been putting it quite mildly.

Since then, more information has come out saying that Lehmberg was screaming curse words and being combative. She had to be put in a restraint chair in an isolation room. A spit guard was fastened to her face to keep her from spitting on her jailers.

Apparently wanting to put the incident behind her as quickly as possible, Lehmberg pleaded guilty this Friday to a Class A misdemeanor (her BAC was .23, making her extremely intoxicated) and accepted a sentence that included 45 days in jail.

Lehmberg has apologized for the incident and has said she has no intentions on leaving her job. But others might make her tenure quite difficult.

According to Texas law, any citizen can petition for the removal of a district attorney when they have been found to be intoxicated either on or off duty. A former assistant state attorney general and administrative law judge for the Texas Workforce Commission filed such a petition this week, according to the Dallas Morning News.

What price Lehmberg ultimately pays for her DUI will remain to be seen. But her speedy trip through the courts may not be enough to put the entire thing behind her. On the contrary, the entire incident has thrust the public official into center stage.

When you are accused of DUI or another serious offense, you don’t get special treatment in the courts. But you do have rights. Contact our offices today to discuss the nature of your charges and how we might be able to help.

On Dec. 18, 2012, the Dallas Morning News reported that the a female state trooper was being sued in federal court for violating the rights of two women. The lawsuit states that the women were pulled over for littering (throwing cigarette butts out of the window), but that the male trooper who pulled them over thought they might be smoking marijuana.

After searching the vehicle and finding no evidence of drugs, the lawsuit alleges the trooper tried to “morph this situation into a DWI investigation,” administering a field sobriety test. The driver passed. Then, a female trooper was called in to search the two women.

The trooper used the same latex glove on both women, searching inside of their underwear and allegedly performing a cavity search on their vaginas and anuses. For her part, the trooper says, the search was consensual and involved no penetration.

The male trooper said he asked for the search because the women were “acting weird”.

Since the incident, the female trooper has been fired. She is now facing charges of sexual assault and her colleague is accused of theft, for stealing the legitimate prescription oxycodone that one of the women had on them.

The two women involved were family, an aunt and niece. Both were said to be traumatized from the event.

Since the indictment, an attorney for the trooper has spoken out, calling the allegations “completely bogus” and says his client passed a polygraph test regarding the incident. But, as we know, polygraphs are unreliable and inadmissible in court.

Stories like this seem to come out of left field. The women weren’t committing a serious criminal act—no one could successfully argue that “acting weird” and being a litterbug warrants a cavity search. And to have two troopers agree that this was an acceptable method of investigation is alarming, to put it mildly.

If you are facing criminal charges, it’s understandable that you don’t trust the police. After all, they are the ones who initiated your arrest. Contact our offices today to talk to someone on your side—to discuss your legal options and how we might be able to help.

The article is devoid of the word “drone” and instead calls the unmanned aircrafts “remote-controlled helicopters.” Steering clear of the vilified drone term could potentially help the police’s campaign to gain public confidence in their use of the machines.

Police Helicopter Drone (Star-Telegram/Khampha Bouaphanh)

The article mentions these drones (make no mistake, they are drones) will be used for “operations ranging from investigating fatal crashes on the two interstate highways that traverse the city (Arlington) to assessing damage from tornadoes and floods to helping search for missing people.” There’s no mention of crime or surveillance.

Again, to paint the drones in a positive light, the article mentions the restrictions placed on domestic police drones, including that they must stay lower than 400 feet and cannot be flown north of I-30 because of the Dallas-Fort Worth airport (though they mention the police as working with officials to change the latter restriction).

We are assured these drones will not “be in the trunks of police cars going down the road.” But, who cares how they are transported. What the people really want (and deserve) to know is the requirements for police using the drones in their primary role as law enforcers.

In many states, legislation has been passed to limit the usage of drones in surveillance, requiring warrants. While such legislation has been introduced in Texas, it hasn’t been made law.

Until then, the police have few concrete restrictions, though their use thus far is believed to be quite limited.

As nice as it would be to have police departments once again focused on serving (rather than criminalizing) the public, the ploy to convince people that police departments are purchasing drones for nothing more than natural disasters and missing persons is laughable. Police purchase toys (like drones, tanks, and weapons) to use them in the enforcement of criminal laws. And the only things standing between these militaristic “toys” and the general public is our faith in the rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

In the pursuit of criminalization, police and prosecutors will attempt to cross constitutional lines. From improper searches and seizures to questionable interrogation practices, such behavior can violate your rights. When you are accused of a crime, you need someone advocating for these rights on your behalf. Contact our offices today to discuss how we can help.

“If the remedy is unaffordable, justice is denied.”

Texas Supreme Court Chief Justice Wallace Jefferson “held court” in front of a joint session of the state Legislature last week and indicated major changes are needed in the Texas justice system. Namely, he said, justice is currently only afforded to those who can afford it. He also questioned the criminalization of school children and how the state plans to deal with wrongful convictions.

It was his biennial State of the Judiciary speech and he used the time wisely—blasting everything that’s wrong with the current system.

“Do we have liberty and justice for all? Or have we come to accept liberty and justice for only some?” he asked lawmakers. “If the remedy is unaffordable, justice is denied.”

He called on lawmakers to increase legal aid, stating that although they’ve increased funding to the poorest defendants in recent years, it still isn’t enough.

He also called them to task on the criminalization of youth, where 300,000 Class C misdemeanor tickets were doled out in Texas schools last year. These tickets, mostly written for disruptive conduct, are sending our youngest citizens to court and even leaving some of them locked up with a criminal record.

“We must keep our children in school, and out of our courts, to give them the opportunity to follow a path of success, not a path toward prison.”

The High Court’s highest judge said the state needs an Innocent Commission to review cases of possible wrongful convictions. He pointed out that 117 Texans have been exonerated in the past 25 years and the state still doesn’t have a single body equipped with looking into these cases, a shame indeed.

Finally, Jefferson said politics has no place in the judiciary, and changing judges every time someone takes office from a different political party takes office has got to stop. Jefferson is one of nine Republican justices on the nine-member court.

“Addressing these challenges in our justice system requires a fundamental shift in thinking,” said Jefferson. “The courts must, themselves, reform. We need to change the way we do business to better meet the needs of citizens and employers across our state.”

It’s refreshing to see a judge call for progressive reform in so many areas of the justice realm. What lawmakers and criminal justice officials in the state do with these recommendations remains to be seen, but it’s nice to know the judiciary sees the issues for what they are.

If you are charged with a crime, whether it’s a nonviolent drug offense or something more serious, you need to know you have someone on your side when you go before the judge. Under the current laws, you could face serious penalties for even a non-violent offense. Contact us today to discuss your case and the legal options available to you.

According to the Associated Press, the officers worked on a task force that targeted drug trafficking within the community. In other words, their main duty was to enforce drug laws, not make a profit off of them. But, being close to the action, the officers allegedly saw an opportunity for fast money.

The officers’ arrests are related to the arrests of drug trafficking ring leaders Fernando Guerra Sr. and Fernando Guerra Jr. The Guerra ring in essence employed officers to steal drugs from the competition. The Guerras would allegedly set up a drug buy between themselves and another faction. The officers would bust the other guys after the deal and confiscate the drugs. But the officers would only charge the drug dealers with possessing part of the drugs, keeping the rest to give back to the Guerras.

In the latest round of indictments, 3 former deputies have been charged with conspiring to possess with intent to distribute cocaine, marijuana, and methamphetamines. While the earlier charged deputies have already resigned, the Sheriff has asked for the resignation of these latest three as well.

The other four task force members were charged in December and their case alleges they “used their positions as law enforcement personnel to escort and protect loads of narcotics.”

While it isn’t common for officers to do completely illegal things on the job, it is hardly unheard of either. And when the officers operate within the underbelly of the local drug trade, sometimes the lure of fast money seems risk-free. After all, if you are the law enforcement, who will enforce the law against you?

In this case, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement received a tip about two of the drug task force members in August of last year, leading to the investigation that went much deeper.

Cops are human. Sure, they make mistakes or have lapses of judgment. But, when they are the ones who lawfully carry weapons and badges, and they have the power to remove (albeit temporarily) your right to come and go, they should be held to a higher standard. Crooked cops are the lowest of the low.

If you are facing drug charges, you need someone on your side, someone who isn’t working for the state. Contact our offices today to discuss your case and how we might be able to help. 

According to the Star-Telegram, lawmakers may reduce penalties for offenses like marijuana possession and prostitution. Some argue that offenses like these can’t justify the costs of incarceration. Currently, both marijuana possession and prostitution are classified as Class B misdemeanors, carrying the potential for jail time.

“Throughout the 90s the whole philosophical bent was to put people in prison and throw away the key,” said state Representative Lon Burnam (D- Fort Worth).”We have far too many people serving prison terms for nonviolent offenses instead of trying to become productive people in society. We can no longer afford to do this.”

Rep. Charles Dutton (D-Houston) has introduced legislation that would reduce possession of a small amount of pot or synthetic pot to a Class C misdemeanor, which carries no incarceration penalty. Another bill seeks to reduce prostitution to the same levels.

The Texas penal code hasn’t been reexamined for 20 years, and some believe it’s time. For example, thresholds that separate a misdemeanor theft from a felony theft could be updated to reflect inflation.

Right now, if a theft is valued at less than $50 it’s a class C misdemeanor. Like all other thresholds (and they are scattered throughout the penal code), this could be elevated without risking public safety because $50 20 years ago resembled far more value than $50 today.

In addition, lawmakers are hoping that reducing some of these offenses to lower-level misdemeanors can reduce costs for indigent defense. When jail time isn’t a possibility, the state doesn’t have to foot the bill for legal aid to defendants who can’t afford it themselves. In other words, if jail isn’t on the table the state won’t provide an attorney.

It’s estimated this could save millions. Indigent defense costs rose $91 million from 2001 to 20012 despite prison and jail population declines.

There are multiple benefits to reducing criminal penalties for nonviolent offenses like drug possession. Convincing some lawmakers might be a challenge, however, as they see any lessening of penalties as a sign of being “soft” on crime.

If you are charged with drug possession or even drug trafficking in the state  of Texas, you need someone on your side advocating for your rights and your best interests. Contact our offices today to discuss your case and how we might be able to help.

Several years ago, Governor Perry vetoed a law that would have required law enforcement officers around the state to get written or recorded consent for vehicle searches during traffic stops. Since then, Austin has reinstated a written consent policy, according to Grits For Breakfast. And now, Dallas is next.

According to the Dallas News, the policy should be in place within the next few weeks. Among other things, the city is hoping it will quell racial profiling, or the claims of profiling.

In 2011, one in eight traffic stops of African Americans resulted in searches. For whites, the figure was one in 28. With rates like this, it’s easy to see how a black person could feel targeted when the cops ask, “mind if I search your car?” after stopping them for speeding or a headlight out.

Police Chief David Brown said that fewer than 5 percent of all traffic stops in the city result in a search. But, these searches, though they represent a small number, are very important. If a cop doesn’t have probable cause or a warrant, he is shooting in the dark when he asks for consent to search.

As a citizen, consent searches require your consent. This means you can say no. No one likes being told no, so there is a good chance the officer won’t like your refusal, but it remains your right. If the officer is deciding whether or not to ticket you or let you go with a warning, he could potentially err on the side of the ticket if he doesn’t like the fact that you denied his search. But, it remains your right.

If you are pulled over for something simple and are treated like a criminal suspect from the get-go, you likely feel like you owe the officer absolutely nothing, and the truth is, you’re right. But, when you end up arrested and facing criminal charges, your feelings about the situation can change.

Whether cops found drugs in your car or if you were arrested for drunk driving, we may be able to help. Contact our offices today to discuss your case.

Texas 1971 official state map (Photo credit: jczart)

“Throughout history, race has unfortunately played a part, an ugly part, in our criminal justice system,” Watkins said, according to the Dallas Morning News. “This is an opportunity for us to address not only the past, and those individuals who are still being affected by the disparities in treatment, but also in looking forward to make sure that we don’t have those same disparities in our criminal justice system.”

The Racial Justice Act would work by allowing a defendant to use specific evidence from his or her case or general statistics to prove that race was a deciding factor in the outcome of their case. In North Carolina, the law has served to free a few people since it was enacted.

In Texas, legislation like this is especially warranted—we lead the nation in exonerations and the racial disparities within our prison system are undeniable. According to Watkins’ office 28 of the 33 people who have been exonerated by DNA evidence since 2001 are black.

The likelihood of such a law making it past conservative lawmakers in our state, however, is slim.

One supporter, chief counsel of the Innocence Project of Texas Jeff Blackburn is not optimistic about Watkins’ efforts being fruitful.

“I think the chance of getting something like that done are between slim and none,” he said.

Even Watkins himself says the odds aren’t in his favor, but sees benefit in “floating” the bill even if it doesn’t pass. “Even if it’s not passed, at least we’ve started the conversation.”

Watkins is the first black elected district attorney in the entire state. His work on DNA exonerations has been nationally recognized and applauded.

It isn’t clear what Watkins’ colleagues think of his bill yet, but Watkins doesn’t seem to care.

“We don’t make a determination on what we’re going to do based upon what other DAs are doing in the state. We’ve never done that. We’re just going to keep pushing the envelope forward to make justice work for the state of Texas, and Texas has an opportunity to lead the country when it comes to what it means to be a prosecutor and what justice is.”

If you are accused of a crime, whether race was a factor or not, you have rights. Whether you are facing years behind prison walls for a serious violent felony or if you are up against your first DUI charge, we may be able to help. 

According to Grits for Breakfast, who broke the story that has so-far flown under mainstream media radar, the Texas Forensic Science Commission conducted an investigation into Salvador after another employee of the lab found that he had reported the contents of pills without truly testing them. By that time he had been with the department for about seven years, and handled 4,944 criminal cases.

The investigation revealed that Salvador’s work suffered throughout his tenure. Poor documentation, flawed techniques, and bad decision-making are just a few of his errors. He reportedly struggled with the volume of his caseload and “at times appeared to not fully understand the science behind the work he was assigned.”

Also according to the FSC investigation, the DPS was more than forgiving for Salvador’s errors. He was repeatedly reprimanded, but maintained his position for seven long years. Part of this could be because the agency tolerated less-than-stellar performance simply because they had so much to do and so few people to do it.

So, what’s the impact of nearly 5,000 cases being handled by a by-all-accounts inept analyst? For many, it could mean freedom. After all, it’s not a stretch to think that defendants who were convicted less than 10 or even 5 years ago are still sitting behind bars.

The majority of cases Salvador processed were in southeast Texas, including Houston. Officials in 36 counties are scrambling to determine if they retained the evidence from these cases. If not, they can’t be retested, Salomon’s results can’t be depended upon, and the convictions will likely have to be overturned.

In other words, it has created a big mess.

The integrity of evidence is crucial in getting a just outcome in court. If it was discovered that an analyst falsified drug test results in one case, how many others have gone undiscovered?

If you are charged with a drug crime, it’s the job of your attorney to help ensure your rights are protected. In some situations, this means calling in an outside professional to ensure the substances you are caught with are, in fact, what the police allege.

Contact our offices today if you are charged with drug possession or even drug trafficking.