|
Recent Posts in Sex Crimes Category
| May 31, 2010 |
| Prostitution Sting in Stockton |
| Posted By Jacot Law Firm |
 |
Undercover prostitution sting nets 21
Sex trade generates other crimes, police say
David Combs talks Wednesday to an undercover police officer posing as a prostitute near Fremont Street and Sierra Nevada Way, above, before he was pulled over and cited by Stockton police.CALIXTRO ROMIAS/The Record
May 27, 2010 12:00 AM
STOCKTON - Wilson Way is busy at midday. Men park in the shade and in parking lots and along the street. They eat lunch with their pickup's windows rolled down, and sometimes call out to the women walking by.
Do you date?
On Wednesday, that question had a good chance of drawing police, instead of leading to a sex-for-money transaction at a motel, or in the front seat of a car. The Stockton Police Department had undercover officers posing as prostitutes waiting for those overtures and walking high-traffic spots on Wilson Way and Sierra Nevada Street.
The mission, run by the Police Department's vice unit, started at noon. Within minutes, and after a short conversation with an undercover officer in the shade of a tree at the corner of Fremont and Sierra Nevada streets, 59-year-old David Combs was stopped by police and cited for allegedly soliciting an act of prostitution.
Before the police were finished with Combs, there were reporters at his car. "I was just trying to eat my lunch," he said.
That the Police Department, after deep budget cuts, still has time and resources for missions like Wednesday's was good news to Agnes Howe, a Neighborhood Watch captain who lives on Sierra Nevada Street.
"I like it when they do the johns, because you've got to hit them in the pocketbook," Howe said. "And the divorce lawyers probably like it."
Police Vice Sgt. Jim Chraska said prostitution, both the crime and the economy around it, generates other crimes. Prostitutes are beaten, intimidated and robbed, and often targeted by rapists and murderers. The people who pay prostitutes for sex are sometimes lured to motel rooms and alleys, where they are robbed, beaten or worse.
"These johns could have been the victims of robberies," Chraska said.
And the spread of sexually transmitted diseases makes victims of people who had otherwise nothing to do with prostitution.
The neighborhoods, like those around Wilson Way, are also affected in other ways. Howe has lived on Sierra Nevada Street for 23 years. Prostitution draws other problems to the neighborhood. It's not uncommon, she said, to see men scoping the neighborhood for burglary targets.
"Some of them are guys walking by holding up their pants because they refuse to wear a belt," she said.
Once, a man walked into Howe's home and demanded she turn on the TV. He didn't leave until police came to take him.
"We need all the help we can get," Howe said. "We can't be overrun because of cuts and layoffs; you can't let the little guy down."
By the mission's end, around 7 p.m., the Police Department had cited 21 people for soliciting prostitution from undercover officers.
Contact reporter Christian Burkin at (209) 546-8279 or cburkin@recordnet.com. Visit his blog at recordnet.com/burkinblog.
Stockton criminal defense attorney Lance Jacot has experience in defending men accused of soliciting prostitutes, and women who are accused of being prostitutes. If you are in need of a criminal defense attorney in San Joaquin County contact The Jacot Law Firm. Local number (209) 463-1800, toll free number 888-823-4883.
|
|
| Continue reading "Prostitution Sting in Stockton" » |
|
Permalink  |
| |
| May 28, 2010 |
| Sex Registration- Penal Code Section 290 |
| Posted By Jacot Law Firm |
|
Penal Code section 290 Registration:
Defendants who are convicted of certain sex crimes, or the attempt to commit them,for the rest of his or her life while residing in California, shall be required to register with the chief of police of the city in which he or she is residing, or the sheriff of the county if he or she is residing in an unincorporated area or city that has no police department, and, additionally, with the chief of police of a campus of the University of California, the California State University, or community college if he or she is residing upon the campus or in any of its facilities, within five working days of coming into, or changing his or her residence within, any city, county, or city and county, or campus in which he or she temporarily resides, and shall be required to register thereafter in accordance with the Act.
The following persons shall be required to register:
Any person who, since July 1, 1944, has been or is hereafter convicted in any court in this state or in any federal or military court of a violation of Section 187 committed in the perpetration, or an attempt to perpetrate, rape or any act punishable under Section 286, 288, 288a, or 289, Section 207 or 209 committed with intent to violate Section 261, 286, 288, 288a, or 289, Section 220, except assault to commit mayhem, Section 243.4, paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (6) of subdivision (a) of Section 261, paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 262 involving the use of force or violence for which the person is sentenced to the state prison, Section 264.1, 266, or 266c, subdivision (b) of Section 266h, subdivision (b) of Section 266i, Section 266j, 267, 269, 285, 286, 288, 288a, 288.3, 288.4, 288.5, 288.7, 289, or 311.1, subdivision (b), (c), or (d) of Section 311.2, Section 311.3, 311.4, 311.10, 311.11, or 647.6, former Section 647a, subdivision (c) of Section 653f, subdivision 1 or 2 of Section 314, any offense involving lewd or lascivious conduct under Section 272, or any felony violation of Section 288.2; any statutory predecessor that includes all elements of one of the above-mentioned offenses; or any person who since that date has been or is hereafter convicted of the attempt or conspiracy to commit any of the above-mentioned offenses.
Special Sentencing Rules for Certain Sex Crimes:
An entirely separate sentencing scheme applies if certain enumerated sex offenses are perpetrated on a single victim on a single occasion. When a defendant is convicted of one or more enumerated sex crimes, the trial court has discretion to ignore the usual rule of Penal Code section 1170.1(a) limiting consecutive terms to one-third the midterm. Instead, the court may sentence some or all of the enumerated sex crimes under Penal Code section 667.6(e), which allows full-term consecutive sentences. Therefore, the trial court has two decisions:
● Whether the terms should be concurrent or consecutive; and
● Whether any consecutive terms for the enumerated sex crimes should be imposed under 1170.1(a) (one-third the midterm) or under 667.6(e) (full consecutive terms).
If a defendant is convicted of enumerated sex offenses committed against different victims, or against the same victim on different occasions, Penal Code 667.6(d) requires full consecutive sentences. This means the Penal Code section 1170.1(a) one-third the midterm formula does not apply. The court has the usual discretion to choose between, and state reasons for, the lower, middle, or upper base term. However, no statement of reasons is necessary for the mandatory consecutive terms. Under these circumstances, leniency may only be expressed by imposing consecutive full lower terms.
Penal Code section 667.6, states:
(a) Any person who is convicted of an offense specified in subdivision (e) and who has been convicted previously of any of those offenses shall receive a five-year enhancement for each of those prior convictions.
(b) Any person who is convicted of an offense specified in subdivision (e) and who has served two or more prior prison terms as defined in Section 667.5 for any of those offenses shall receive a 10-year enhancement for each of those prior terms.
(c) In lieu of the term provided in Section 1170.1, a full, separate, and consecutive term may be imposed for each violation of an offense specified in subdivision (e) if the crimes involve the same victim on the same occasion. A term may be imposed consecutively pursuant to this subdivision if a person is convicted of at least one offense specified in subdivision (e). If the term is imposed consecutively pursuant to this subdivision, it shall be served consecutively to any other term of imprisonment, and shall commence from the time the person otherwise would have been released from imprisonment. The term shall not be included in any determination pursuant to Section 1170.1. Any other term imposed subsequent to that term shall not be merged therein but shall commence at the time the person otherwise would have been released from prison.
(d) A full, separate, and consecutive term shall be served imposed for each violation of an offense specified in subdivision (e) if the crimes involve separate victims or involve the same victim on separate occasions.
In determining whether crimes against a single victim were committed on separate occasions under this subdivision, the court shall consider whether, between the commission of one sex crime and another, the defendant had a reasonable opportunity to reflect upon his or her actions and nevertheless resumed sexually assaultive behavior. Neither the duration of time between crimes, nor whether or not the defendant lost or abandoned his or her opportunity to attack, shall be, in and of itself, determinative on the issue of whether the crimes in question occurred on separate occasions.
The term shall be served consecutively to any other term of imprisonment and shall commence from the time the person otherwise would have been released from imprisonment. The term shall not be included in any determination pursuant to Section 1170.1. Any other term imposed subsequent to that term shall not be merged therein but shall commence at the time the person otherwise would have been released from prison.
(e) This section shall apply to the following offenses:
(1) Rape, in violation of paragraph (2), (3), (6), or (7) of subdivision (a) of Section 261.
(2) Spousal rape, in violation of paragraph (1), (4), or (5) of subdivision (a) of Section 262.
(3) Rape, spousal rape, or sexual penetration, in concert, in violation of Section 264.1.
(4) Sodomy, in violation of paragraph (2) or (3) of subdivision (c), or subdivision (d) or (k), of Section 286.
(5) Lewd or lascivious act, in violation of subdivision (b) of Section 288.
(6) Continuous sexual abuse of a child, in violation of Section 288.5.
(7) Oral copulation, in violation of paragraph (2) or (3) of subdivision (c), or subdivision (d) or (k), of Section 288a.
(8) Sexual penetration, in violation of subdivision (a) or (g) of Section 289.
(9) As a present offense under subdivision (c) or (d), assault with intent to commit a specified sexual offense, in violation of Section 220.
(10) As a prior conviction under subdivision (a) or (b), an offense committed in another jurisdiction that includes all of the elements of an offense specified in this subdivision.
(f) In addition to any enhancement imposed pursuant to subdivision (a) or (b), the court may also impose a fine not to exceed twenty thousand dollars ($20,000) for anyone sentenced under those provisions. The fine imposed and collected pursuant to this subdivision shall be deposited in the Victim-Witness Assistance Fund to be available for appropriation to fund child sexual exploitation and child sexual abuse victim counseling centers and prevention programs established pursuant to Section 13837. If the court orders a fine to be imposed pursuant to this subdivision, the actual administrative cost of collecting that fine, not to exceed 2 percent of the total amount paid, may be paid into the general fund of the county treasury for the use and benefit of the county.
If you or a loved one has been accused of a sexual offense you need to contact Attorney Lance Jacot at The Jacot Law Firm for a free consultation. |
|
| Continue reading "Sex Registration- Penal Code Section 290" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| May 13, 2010 |
| Orange County Sexual Assault Case Goes to Supreme Court |
| Posted By Jacot Law Firm |
|
Three men found guilty in Orange County nearly five years ago of sexually assaulting an apparently unconscious 16-year-old girl and videotaping her have asked the state Supreme Court to overturn their convictions.
Gregory Haidl, 24, the son of former Orange County Assistant Sheriff Donald Haidl; Kyle Nachreiner, 25; and Keith Spann, also 25, were convicted in 2005 of sexual assault and sentenced to six years in prison. All three have been paroled.
Haidl's attorney, Dennis Fischer, said petitions were filed with the state high court last week to hear arguments on why the three should have their convictions overturned and not have to register as sex offenders. But he said the chances of the court agreeing to hear the petitions are "next to none."
All three were 17 years old when the assault occurred in 2002 at the elder Haidl's home in Corona del Mar. They lost their case at the appeals court level last month. This is their last chance to appeal their convictions at the state level.
If the state high court agrees to hear the case, Fischer will argue that the trial judge did not give his client a fair trial because he excluded evidence that the victim participated in similar sexual activity not long before the assault. The woman's sexual history was protected under California's rape shield law.
Fischer also plans to argue that the requirement to register as sex offenders should be dropped because the jury found the trio not guilty on an assault with a deadly weapon charge. Without that charge, Fischer said, they would have been tried as juveniles and would not have to register.
Prosecutors say the men's attempts to clear their records is exactly why they should have to register as sex offenders.s
"Men who are convicted of preying on women who are too intoxicated to say 'no' are sexual predators," said Orange County district attorney's spokeswoman Susan Kang Schroeder. "The public has the right to know who they are, where the live and what they did."
The state Supreme Court has 60 days to decide whether to hear the case.
joseph.serna@latimes.com
Copyright © 2010, The Los Angeles Times
If you have been charged with a sexual offense in Orange County or southern California you need an attorney who has the specialized knowledge to defend you. The consequences of a sex related crime on your record can be devestating. Contact Newport Beach Sex Crimes Attorney Lance Jacot for a free consultation.
(949) 748-6992
4425 Jamboree Roade, Suite 265
Newport Beach, CA 92660
|
|
| Continue reading "Orange County Sexual Assault Case Goes to Supreme Court" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
|