Legal Question in Criminal Law in California

Corrupt local law enforcement sentenced innocent people

My mother and her boyfriend was just sencenced to 290 days with NO alternative sentencing plus 3 years probation for 1.1 gram of meth that her boyfriend said was his the night they raided and again at the trial.Neither one has any priors except one misdeamnor for pot in Nevada. The drug force planted baggies that they did not have nor were they listed on the sheet that night but showed up on the police report. Also planted a needle and syringe that they didn't have. The same judge that signed the search warrant also was the judge that did their trial. My mothers attorney was also the same attorney for the confidential informant. The prosecuting attorney was married to one of the sheriff's that raided them and she cross examined him even at trial. Where can they go for help!There are even more corruption than I listed! Please please help!!


Asked on 9/24/03, 5:15 pm

1 Answer from Attorneys

Edward Hoffman Law Offices of Edward A. Hoffman

Re: Corrupt local law enforcement sentenced innocent people

If your mother's attorney also represented the confidential informant then I see a serious conflict of interest. (Some conflicts of interest can be waived by a defendant who knows all of the pertinent facts, but I don't know if this particular conflict would be waivable and my sense is that it would not.) Was your mother aware of this conflict at the time? Was it discussed in court so that it is part of the record? There may be a very strong argument to be made on appeal and/or habeas corpus here.

However, the rest of the issues you describe don't seem very promising. Defendants frequently claim that evidence was planted by the police, and courts sometimes agree. It seems this court did not. That is a factual ruling which will almost certainly not be disturbed on appeal.

The fact that the same judge issued the warrant and heard the case is not a problem unless there is some reason to believe the warrant was issued in error. Your question does not give any reason to believe this was the case, so I don't see a problem.

The prosecutor and the sherriff's deputy are on the same side, so there is no conflict created where the two of them happen to be married.

The fact that the boyrfriend said the meth was his is not as important as you might think, since it is possible for two people to be in possession of the same item at the same time, even if only one of them actually owns it. Additionally, the judge or jury did not have to accept his testimony and could have believed he was lying to protect your mother.

Finally, the sentence your mother and her boyfriend received seems reasonable for this type of crime and for the amount of meth involved, especially in light of the prior.

As I said, though, the conflict of interest caused by your mother's lawyer also representing the informant sounds like a very promising argument to raise on appeal. Appeals must be brought within a relatively short time after judgment is entered, so I hope you didn't wait long before posting. I do a great deal of appellate work and the occasional habeas petition, and I would be pleased to discuss this case with you if you would like to contact me directly.

Read more
Answered on 10/03/03, 4:21 pm


Related Questions & Answers

More Criminal Law questions and answers in California