Archive | Pending Legislation RSS feed for this section

lobby my corgi

27 Oct

funny story about people getting upset that lobbyist walks Jerry Brown’s dog here. old news, I know, but what can I say i’ve been busy.

dear GJB I love you and I hate you

13 Oct

It’s like in one swoop of the pen GJB makes me simultaneously happy and sad.  He vetoes this bill tryna extend dat stat of limitations for sex crimes. great.

then he vetoes the bill that would make drug crimes wobblers so all drugs are treated equally

 

you put a corgi in the govna’s mansion.  i love you. you eff over future law breakers. i hate you.  GJB you’re making me schitzo!!! you are like dr Jekyll and mr hyde!

Brown signs revenge porn bill into law; aka a very poopy law

1 Oct

Oy vey. JB signed the so called revenge porn law into effect. Barf. The law is essentially meant to ban the situation where you consent to a sex tape or nude photo with yo man and said man distributes the photos/videos after you break up. Now, doing so will be a misdemeanor in the neverending list of things that should not be crimes that is commonly known as Penal Code section 647.

My problem with this law is threefold.

First, any law that requires the specific intent, as this does,  to “cause serious emotional distress” and proof that the victim suffered from emotional distress is farkakta.  In general, i do not agree with criminalizing privacy invasions. leave the civil system to deal with that.  Privacy is surely important. But unless we are talking about fearing for your life, harms to the psyche should be addressed as torts.  Why? Because we are talking about prison and never ending collateral consequences and/or bars to future employment.  We should not impose the worst punishments available in our so called civilized society because someone gets her feelings hurt.

Second, why is it so much worse to publish a sex tape to get revenge than to make money? You think Kendra gave a shit if her ex published the tape to cause her psychic injury or simply to make money? the damage is still done. So why are we distinguishing between the two motives? And what if someone is motivated by both? Is he still liable under the revenge porn statute?

Third, what about free speech? Experts apparently do not think there is a problem. I beg to differ. I’m not a first amendment expert. I just go on my instincts people. and the JJC first amendment radar says W. T. F.  If I wanna post something online I should be able to post it. THIS IS AMERICA!!! As long as no real live kids are involved or no one’s life is being threatened, i should be able to do want i want.

Finally, these laws were apparently put into action by women (and their moms) upset after their exes published their porn online.  My thoughts on that are that I am not a fan of putting people in jail based on feelings of people who got effed over by other people. Emotion should not drive policy. Further, why are we listening to someone who was willing to video tape herself having sex? Kidding, kidding, kidding.

I really believe that one day there should be a concept of comparative liability applied at sentencing or in whether a crime is a misdo or felony in criminal law. It’s like look, you signed up to do something private on a platform that can potentially be made public. Where is your responsibility?? This could similarly be applied to these ponzi scheme victims who are bilked out of millions because they invested upon promises of ridiculous returns. At some point are they not responsible for being stupid and giving their money away? At some point when a person, an adult (note if the porn was of someone under 18 it would be a crime already=child porn and distributing child porn), consents to something said person should have to live with the consequences.

JJC Verdict on New Law: Poop. Poopity poopity poo.

and we’re back

30 Sep

after a (far too) long recess, JJC is back, with a vengeance! just kidding. no vengeance. but im back baby. and there is so much to say! here’s some jjc from the last week…

juice
Nothing too exciting.  Khloe drops Odom from her last name on twitter. Yawn.  Miley has a documentary airing on MTV. Allllllright. This new MTV shows looks AMAZING. Chris Brown continues to whine like the baby he is.

Dear Chris Brown I’m no expert on publicity, but I can tell you this: in general, people don’t like bullies. They like fair fights. So, if Jay-Z allegedly sold drugs before he was famous then later supposedly stabbed some dude over some kind of rapper feud bullshit, fans will look the other way. For one, who knows what the hell happened it was a mele. For two, that he supposedly sold drugs is no where near the same as slamming America’s Caribbean sweetheart into a car window.  You vs. RiRi was not necessarily a fair fight because you’re a dude. Sexist? Perhaps. But reality.   When you pick on someone who is a woman when you are a dude the public is not going to look the other way. Especially when you never seemed to acknowledge it instead you complained about people refusing to forgive you. Also, Jay-Z’s music is good. For the umpteenth time,Will you quit this woe is me bullshit already or what??!?!??!

(in)justice

this makes me feel like i’m being punched in the stomach. in general JJC is anti-stings. If you have to create crime to fight it then technically aren’t you breaking even instead of making a dent in crime? Others might say you are preventing some future crime. I say prevention shmention. who knows what will happen in the future. alls I know is it makes me sad that you are arresting poor immigrants looking to feed their families and without the means or resources to obtain a license.  Yes, licenses are important. But where are all these republicans when you need them with the “let the market decide” language???

in other news, I hate when cops are accused of crimes. At the risk of sounding cliche, it is like a true sophie’s choice situation.  On one hand, if a cop is accused of a crime he is accused of a crime and therefore, as a criminal defense attorney, I don’t want to see anyone go down on some bull honkey.  Exhibit A: I do not think someone should be convicted of rape based on a woman making mime movements and the police interpreting said movements as descriptions of rape. Sign language to report a rape? Ok.  Sherades to report a rape? Not ok.  Dear founding fathers, can you go back and time and add to the 6th Amendment you have the right to not be imprisoned based on police interpreting hand movements???? So, it’s like, just cause D=a cop do I suddenly think pantomiming a statement should result in said cop serving serious time? NO.

On the other hand, I really do not like cops. Assuming a cop, someone who swears to be good, does something bad, then yes, i am happy when he goes down.  That said, surely there can be innocent cops falsely accused of a crime.  I suspect before a cop is charged with a crime many eyes see the evidence — at least many more than when joe noncop gets charged with a crime.  So if I see a cop charged I have my own bias that he’s good for it. Which is totally hypocritical.

I still do not know how to reconcile my love for the constitution, disdain for arbitrary power, and the idea of a cop being prosecuted on some farkakta theory of criminal liability.

Justice

Unlikely Friends will be on the discovery channel on 10/21 at 10PM.  Definitely worth watching.  One really good quote was someone saying you will not find a single perpetrator in prison who is not also himself a victim.  That’s tha truth. The answer is not that people shouldn’t pay for their crimes, that any one person or victim must forgive her perpetrator, or that people should not be held responsible. It is more like what would happen if we truly focused on rehabilitation and restoring justice instead of merely on punishment and (read: often arbitrary punishment?) Not everyone in prison is ready to reform.  But, we continue to lock more people up every year, at rates totally out of whack to the rest of the world and compared to our own rates 30 years ago, and where are getting? What are we accomplishing? It is time we are smarter about justice; this movie is a great way to learn.

On a personal level, the message that forgiveness is a powerful thing is powerful for everyone no matter what the transgression is that you must forgive.  If this one dude in the film, a police officer who was permanently disabled and blinded in one eye by a bank robber escapee who shot him, can forgive his perpetrator than we can all strive to open our hearts and be kinder to those in our lives who have hurt us, however greatly or slightly.

corgis

more corgi videos of corgis and toys please:

 

my own corgi, Jane Doe, had an irregular color spot on her eye which has worsened and we had a biopsy taken. Should find out results this week. Please say a prayer for Jane Doe’s health. Trying not to worry :/

your daily JJC

10 Sep

Juice:
Tom Hanks on a DV jury???? what the what?! Would you kick him or keep him? my colleague aptly noted unless you think sleepless in Seattle sam will be on your side, you gotsta kick him.  if you’re worried he’ll vote g or if you’re shootin for a hang you might not wanna keep forest gump, who’s surely a leader. Who’s going to go against the guy from big? and with all dem oscars? plus he’s so charismatic. I’d be shocked if this one hung.

Justice:
JJC assemblydude crush Ammiano had introduced a bill in the senate that would make it so local police cannot detain someone purely on an ICE hold unless that person has a qualifying prior conviction. As I previously blogged, there are some priors I think are unfairly included, but this is a HUGE start. And. it. just. passed. the Senate. whoop whoop.

Then, that awesome bill making possession of controlled substances (see e.g. crack, coke, heroin) wobblers was just. sent. to the governa.  badda bing badda booom good things are happening.

Corgis:

Wow, I just found out that Sutter Brown is adopted!!!! Literally.  His mommy is actually Jerry Brown’s sister! Luckily for Sutter’s new found celebrity lifestyle, Kathleen Brown has no plans to pull a baby veronica situation and, as far as I can tell, ICWA is not at issue. KB said SB can stay with JB.

Legislative Update: transporting drugas bill that would criminalize only transportation for sale passes senate

29 Aug

Wohooooo! dem cali cali senators passed AB 721 which would amend our stupid drugas law that makes it a crime to “transport” drugs. Now it is only a crime to transport said drugs if the purpose of transportation is for sale.  beautiful. Now goes to assembly then to JB.

Drugs_In_Car-290x240

JJC Verdict: me likey.

Bill to make it so Police Department can’t consider “Brady List” in employment decisions re bad coppers

28 Aug

Yeah. Jerry Brown is deciding whether to veto the most ridiculously offensive bill ever presented.  There is this thing called a “Brady list” (confession,  I had never heard of or seen this so called list in any county, or been privy to information disclosed pursuant to said list, which is not to say it doesn’t exist).   Apparently, it is a list of cops with criminal convictions or suspect personnel files that DA’s keep so that when the cop is a witness in their case they disclose the information to the defense.

Compare this awesome article in the East Bay Express about the costs of employing a bad copper to this editorial by the San Jose Mercury News about the proposed legislation that our nut job legislature passed and it is just waiting to be signed into law by JB.

The legislation, SB 313, introduced by a dude who has received $2.6 million from police and firefighter associations and unions from 2011-2012, would make it so that no “punitive action” could be taken against a police officer simply because his name is on a Brady list.  True, the bill says that the underlying conduct that caused the officer to be on the list can still be considered for disciplinary actions.  That the officer has been placed on the list, though, cannot be considered.

Dear Sutter Brown, make your pops veto this POS!!! Two Barks for “VETO!”

I’m Just A Bill: Brilliant

21 Aug

I decided to cut the middle-man and just go directly to Ammiano’s website for a list of all bills he authored so I could easily blog about the bestest crimlaw legislation in the works.  Brilliant.  Not that idea (though actually that kind of was), but the bills being presented by Ammiano.  I seriously heart this man.

Today’s I’m Just A Bill goes to AB702 which would change sex offender registration in California as we know it.  Right now, the dude who got drunk and slapped some girl’s butt in the bar must register as a sex offender for the same amount of time as the dude who kidnapped and raped a 4-year old at gunpoint. (Read: the rest of their lives).  This bill would seek to modify registration into to tiers where length of registration is variable depending on the nature of the offense and if the person re-offends.

By comparison, the bill’s analysis notes that California is only one of four states nation wide requiring lifetime registration for anyone ordered to register:

“According to a 2010 CASOMB review:

a) Half of the states require 10 years for the majority of
registrants, and life for the rest, using risk assessment
or offense-based classifications to determine who registers
for life.
b) Some states allow registrants to petition the courts for
termination of registration, often after 10 years of
registration.
c) Five states require registration for 15 years, 25 years,
or life, depending on the offense.
d) Other states use a combination of 15/life; 20/life;
25/life; 5/10/20/life, 10/25/life; 10/15/25/life; or
10/15/20/life, depending on risk or offense
classifications.
e) Four states (California, Alabama, Florida, and South
Carolina) require lifetime registration for all
registrants, and one state requires 15 years for all
registrants.

California has the most registered sex offenders in the
country, about 90,000, about 75% of whom are in the community.
The rest are incarcerated. This large number is due to the
population of the state, the length of time California has
registered sex offenders (retroactive to 1944), lifetime
registration.”

The bill creates three tiers of registration that vary by length: 10 years, 20 years, or life.  Personally, I’d like to see length of probation, 5 years, 10 years if we are not going to abolish it altogether, but baby steps people, baby steps.

There are some other problems with the tiers including that any violent felony conviction subsequent to a nonviolent sex offense conviction would make someone ineligible for a 10 year registration period.

The specifics of which tier a given person falls in depend on the person’s SARATSO risk score, whether the offense was violent, whether the person picks up any new felonies, the nature of the original conviction and/or subsequent conviction, and more. Ironically, one rule is if you are SVPd you must register for life.  Um, who gets SVPd then gets out ever? Isn’t that the whole point of SVP?

dreaming-of-being-a-law

JJC Verdict: Brilliant first step. Still problematic, but if we can make DOJ implement a system to remove people from the registry, and if the law starts to recognize that there are degrees of culpability in sex crimes, maybe we can start to chip away at the irrational scarlet letter that is the sex offender registration law.  Thus, WTG, Ammiano.  xoxo

 

I’m Just a Bill: Bootsie or Brilliant?

20 Aug

New recurring post on JJC will be to inform you of pending legislation. I have pulled many of the pending bills which seek to change or add to the Penal Code and the Health and Safety Code. Which is why I haven’t posted in awhile, that shit took a lot of time! Not to mention that there were some amazeballs bills only to later find out, once I started drafting this post, that they were moved to the bill graveyard by the author (Read: Ammiano [JJC Assembly Member Crush].) (Read also: I’m not surprised, they were too good to be true see e.g. AB 885 which would have made the discovery violation jury instruction read that the prosecutor’s violation of 1054 or Brady may be circumstantial evidence that there is reasonable doubt as to the defendants guilt. Unfortunately, Ammiano moved this to the “inactive bills” purgatory.)

On to the bills.

Remember School House Rock “I’m Just a Bill”? Warning, this jingle is SUPER catchy. Will get stuck in your head all day long.

“…I’m just a bill, I’m only a bill….”

 

Let’s start this recurring post on a positive note. Today’s I’m just a bill: bootsie or brilliant goes to Senator Leno, Senator Hancock and Senator Jackson who co-authored SB 649. This bill would make possession of certain controlled substances, e.g. cocaine and heroin, wobblers. I.e. a person could be charged with, convicted of, or later have their conviction reduced to, a misdemeanor if they simply possessed drugas. It makes no sense that currently someone (read: many people) receive misdemeanors for possession of methamphetamine but felonies for cocaine. This bill will fix that issue. Interestingly, SF DA Gascon wants to go further than this bill with an initiative to make it so these simple possession crimes are straight up misdemeanors with no potential for them to ever be prosecuted as felonies. JJC agrees. Though, you should support this bill in the meantime.

JJC Verdict: this one is not rocket science but it is still brilliant. Felony convictions for crack is just whack. Contact your legislator to send your support via the ACLU here.

dreaming-of-being-a-law

 

Make Simple Drug Poss. a misdo. in CA! Email your State Senator

16 Aug

Currently, simple possession of heroin or cocaine is a felony, but simple possession of  methamphetamine can be charged as or reduced to a misdemeanor.  Wacky. SB 649 would amend the Health and Safety Code to make it so that prosecutors and judges have the discretion to make possession of heroin and cocaine misdemeanors.  If you wish to support this, click here to send an email to your state senator.

Shout out to the bill’s sponsor: SF Senator Leno. Whoop Whoop! WTG Senator Leno!!!