Michigan Criminal Lawyer Blog

Shotime’s ‘Shameless’ Accurately Portrays Experience of a First-Time Offender

March 11, 2014 | Abdo Law Firm

A recent storyline on the Shotime series ‘Shameless‘ has focused on the show’s protagonist being charged with a crime for the first time. Fiona Gallagher, Shameless’ lead played brilliantly by Emmy Rossum, is charged with narcotic possession and child endangerment when a child in her care accidentally ingests drugs at her home. In my opinion, the portrayal of the indignities she suffers and choices she is faced with are for the most part realistic depictions of a first time offender’s interaction with the criminal justice system. I think this storyline is laudable, because it is an aspect of the law often overlooked in popular culture (TV shows and movies tend to focus on corporate legal proceedings and capital crimes it seems).

When Fiona is arrested, she is brought to jail awaiting her arraignment. Shameless unflinchingly outlines the discomfort and invasion of privacy one endures in jail. Something I hear almost every day in my office is ‘One night was enough, I will never go back.’ The arraignment is shown next, accurately so as well. Fiona is unable to retain counsel so her bond ends up being set high. Bond, for those who don’t know is an insurance policy that you will return to court for future dates. I’ve found that people who retain counsel have a better shot at getting a reasonable bond, even where they are charged with a felony.

Fiona then struggles with her public defender. While the public defender seems very well versed in nuances of Fiona’s charge, she’s spread thin. This can certainly happen in real life. Public defenders can get very large caseloads that they have to stay competent on and split their time between. There are a lot of capable public defenders, much like Fiona’s, but access to them can be a real issue as shown in Shameless.

Have You Had Your Dose of Whiskey Today? Prescriptions for Booze Were Available During Prohibition

December 16, 2013 | Abdo Law Firm

WHISKEY RX.jpg

From 1920 until 1933, the sale, production and use of alcoholic beverages was illegal in the United States. This was known as Prohibition. What I didn’t know was that a doctor could prescribe alcohol for medicinal purposes pursuant to the National Prohibition Act during this era. The image which is located at the top of this article was obtained from an actual scanned prescription which was issued on December 20, 1928 to a resident of Washington, D.C. The prescription was for 1 pint of whiskey. The prescription contains the pre-printed words, “Prescription Form for Medicinal Liquor.” Perhaps the person who obtained the medicinal liquor had a cough due to cold or was just stocking up before New Years!

Prescriptions for alcohol were actually quite common during prohibition. The substance whiskey was also prescribed under the label of “spiritus frumenti” as the image below illustrates.

Does this resemble the course of action which we are now seeing regarding the medicinal use of marijuana?

Macomb County Juvenile Court, Juvenile Delinquency Cases: Closely Related to Adult Criminal Cases

November 24, 2013 | Abdo Law Firm

juvenile justice.jpg
Technically, juvenile cases are not considered criminal. However, juvenile cases, along with the responsibilities of an attorney representing a juvenile, are akin to criminal cases in many ways. The Michigan Penal Code applies to juvenile conduct. This means that juvenile crimes are labeled as a felony or misdemeanor which can become part of a permanent record. In addition, a juvenile may be detained or placement may be ordered. However, a juvenile may not be placed in an adult prison institution unless tried as an adult under certain circumstances. Even when tried as an adult, the juvenile is not housed with the adult inmates.

The main focus of this publication will pertain to “juvenile delinquency cases” with emphasis on our firm’s experience in the Juvenile Division of the Macomb County Circuit Court.

Juvenile Delinquency: Crimes by Persons Age 16 or Younger Treated as Juveniles

Ferndale Follows Trend of Marijuana Reform in Michigan

November 12, 2013 | Abdo Law Firm

ferndale marijuana legalization.jpg As of last week, Ferndale voted to join Detroit, Grand Rapids, Flint, Ypsilanti, and Kalamazoo in restructuring their marijuana laws to allow for personal use in the homes of consenting adults. Ferndale, neighbor city of Royal Oak, Detroit, Hazel Park, and Pleasant Ridge, approved an ordinance that will permit personal marijuana use. Similar measures were passed in Lansing and Jackson. The ordinance was passed by nearly 70%. This may indicate possible future widespread acceptance of marijuana by the electorate as a whole. Lansing’s Mayor stated that “the public is far ahead of most politicians on this issue, as evidenced by the overwhelming support for medical marijuana when it was on the statewide ballot several years ago, as well as decriminalization of small quantities of marijuana in cities like Ann Arbor, Detroit, Flint, and Grand Rapids.” This may be a bellwether of things to come as Mayor Bernero went on to say “My personal view is that marijuana prohibition has been a complete failure that has mainly succeeded in filling up our prisons with minor drug offenders at an extremely high cost to the taxpayers of this state. Our police officers and courts have more important things to do than pursue and prosecute these violations.”

So what exactly did Ferndale’s voters approve? The language on the ballot was as follows;

“Amend city code to allow anyone 21 or older to use, possess or transfer less than 1 ounce of marijuana on private property?”

Notable Cases in 2013: Abdo Law Gets the Results

October 14, 2013 | Abdo Law Firm

Abdo Law Firm prides itself on empathy, understanding, personal service, and striving for the optimal resolution of all legal matters that we take on. We are entering our fourth year with Matthew as a partner, and are continuing to grow. We always looking to hone our skills and engage challenging issues. This year we have had hundreds of satisfied clients, each case is very important to our Firm. The ‘Notable Cases” series is intended to share with readers cases that had complex legal and factual questions. ‘Winning’ in law is not always black-and-white concept. In some cases, a win is helping a guilty client reach a best-case-scenario disposition of their case (reductions, keeping charges off their record, and reducing jail/minimizing probationary terms). In other instances, a win is a dismissal or NG verdict. With every new case, we sit with our clients and determine exactly how we can win and the best means of reaching that objective. Read below to learn more about some our Firm’s more demanding cases and the tactics we employed defending our clients.

Sterling Heights: Moving Violation Causing Death

In the summer of 2012, we were approached by a client who was being charged with Moving Violation Causing Death. The client was in a situation where a criminal misdemeanor would have cost her job, and moreover harsh severe license sanctions. The facts were as follows. The client was backing from her driveway when her car made contact with a bicyclist, the bicyclist died as a result. Nonetheless, our client maintained she was backing up slowly and never saw the bicyclist until she heard contact. There were no third-party eye witnesses and all of the evidence corroborated the client’s rendition of the facts. There was no exterior damage done to the car.

Federal Child Pornography Crackdown; Don’t Talk to the Police

August 21, 2013 | Abdo Law Firm

computer crime scene.jpg
Our law firm is seeing a wave of cases which involve the criminal offense “possession of child pornography” in both the State of Michigan and Federal Court system. The increase in child pornography arrests is related to the Federal child porn crackdown which involves several law enforcement agencies.

The Macomb Area Computer Enforcement (M.A.C.E.) is a unit of the Macomb County Sheriff Department which is dedicated to the investigation of computer crimes. This unit also cooperates with Federal authorities in the investigation and prosecution of child pornography cases.

How law enforcement operates to catch child porn offenders

Keep Your License After a DUI 2nd Offense: Michigan’s Sobriety Court Program

August 16, 2013 | Abdo Law Firm

Under Michigan Law, if you are convicted of 2 or more drinking and driving offenses within 7 years (or 3 within 10) your license is revoked indefinitely. A revocation, unlike a suspension, will not automatically expire or terminate. There is a mandatory one-year waiting period before the suspension can be reviewed. Moreover, if the first appeal is successful there is an additional one-year monitoring period where you must install a “blow ‘n go” device in your automobile. Any serious violations of the device will result in another license revocation. Therefore, when convicted of a second DUI in most circumstances you are looking at a MINIMUM of two years before you have a full license again. A DUI 2nd, for this reason, is a dramatic and life changing event. You’re put in a position where you are slapped with fines, fees, costs and court requirements yet have no way to drive to make a living or attend probation obligations. However, the State of Michigan has recently enacted a sobriety court program that allows individuals who would otherwise lose their license to sidestep the mandatory one-year waiting period. Our office believes this is an outstanding program as it helps to promote lasting sobriety through its license incentive.

What is Sobriety Court?

Sobriety court is a highly structured term of probation, which places its emphasis on encouraging sobriety. Normally this will involve graduated phases and mandatory AA attendance. With the new sobriety court legislation, offenders with a DUI that would normally lose their license are eligible for a restricted license before waiting the mandatory one-year period. However, if participants of sobriety court violate the terms, they are most likely looking at jail time.

How does Sobriety Court Work?

When a candidate is eligible and the sobriety court program has openings they will be screened prior to acceptance. This is normally done after the pretrial/acceptance of plea but prior to sentencing. Candidates must show a willingness to accept the terms of the program and be serious about their sobriety before they’re allowed to enter the sobriety court program. After starting the program, participants have their license revoked for 45 days. After the 45 days you must install a BAIID (also known as an “interlock ignition” or “blow n’ go” as stated above). The breathalyzer device has to remain on your car for a minimum of 320 days after the suspension. During this period driving is restricted for purposes of school, employment and court obligations. When you fulfill the mandatory revocation period by the state (often one-year) AND complete your sobriety court program, you will be eligible to petition the State for a full license. However, failure while attending the sobriety court program will not only result in a revocation of your driver’s license, but may also include time in jail.

Where is Sobriety Court Available?

Our Firm has assisted clients getting admitted to Sobriety Court in the following jurisdictions;
• Warren District Court
• Roseville District Court
• Clinton Twp. District Court
• Royal Oak District

Nonetheless, because this is a new program many districts are just now implementing it. We can advise you if the court for the city/township in which you’ve been charged offers a sobriety court program.

Can Sobriety Court be Transferred if My District Doesn’t Offer It?

YES. We have been able to assist clients with the transfer of their probation, from the original court to one that offers this program.
Continue reading ›

The BIG Question: Am I Going to Jail? Sentencing in District Court

May 21, 2013 | Abdo Law Firm

This is the most frequent question that lawyers receive from their clients, “Am I going to jail?”

Most people being charged with a crime for the first time are not familiar with the justice system and do not know what to expect from their case. For the most part, first time misdemeanor offenders who are compliant with their bond conditions are not looking at serving time in jail. The exaggerated fear of jail is often what causes defendant to avoid legal obligations, skip court dates, evade law enforcement, and ironically is what lands them in jail. If you’re being charged with a misdemeanor and are scared and anxious, it is most likely more manageable than you think. This article gives an overview of whether or not a defendant should be anticipating jail time in their misdemeanor criminal case. Generalizations made here apply primarily to experience in Macomb County, though our office has found the following to be true throughout its practice in Metro Detroit.

An attorney cannot ethically guarantee a result in a criminal case. The bottom line is that nobody owns the judge. However, the reality, based upon our experience, is that jail is seldom imposed upon individuals convicted of misdemeanors in the District Courts.

There are numerous exceptions which will explained further below.
Unlike their Circuit Court counterparts, District Courts do not have sentencing guidelines. This gives District Court judges very broad discretion in fashioning sentences. This usually means that case strategy is best tailored to the individual policies of the specific judge that will be sentencing our office’s defendant. First time offenders, in just about all cases, are probably NOT looking at jail for the following offenses.

– Drunk driving
– Operating under the influence of drugs
– Retrial fraud
– Misdemeanor assault crimes/domestic violence
– Driving while license suspended
– Possession of marijuana/paraphernalia/use of marijuana
– Disorderly conduct
– Minor in possession/ open intoxicants
– Malicious destruction of property
– Traffic misdemeanors
– Misdemeanor theft/ fraud crimes

In just about all of the above circumstances the offender will be looking at a probationary term. Broadly speaking one year of probation should be anticipated. Sometimes the court will depart from that for the better or worse. Most of the Districts in Macomb impose one year probation for first offense misdemeanors. Some of the courts in Oakland County impose longer probation terms. Moreover, most first time offenders (excluding DUIs and traffic offenses) are eligible for some type of diversionary program that will keep their records clean. While jail is not necessarily on the table in most misdemeanor cases, it is our function to minimize the terms and conditions of probation.
Continue reading ›

How Will a Criminal Charge Affect My Concealed Pistol License (CPL)?

May 6, 2013 | Abdo Law Firm

concealed pistol.jpg
At Abdo Law, we deal with many clients that maintain a Concealed Pistol License, or CPL, and the question always arises: will I lose my CPL if I’m charged or convicted of a crime? The answer is maybe, but Abdo Law’s dedicated attorneys will do everything in their power to guide clients through the process.

The State of Michigan sets guidelines for those wishing to obtain a CPL:

• Applicant must be at least 21 years of age;

• Be a citizen of the United States or an immigrant lawfully admitted into the United States (green card holders)

• Be a resident of the State of Michigan for at least 6 months prior to application
• Successfully complete a pistol safety training course
• The applicant may not be subject to involuntary hospitalization, an order finding legal incapacitation or a finding of not guilty by reason of insanity
• Not be subject to a conditional bond release that prohibits the purchase/use of firearms
• Not be subject of a personal protection order (PPO)

• Applicant has not been prohibited from having firearms in his/her possession, pursuant to MCL 750.224f

• Have no felony charge pending in Michigan, or any other jurisdiction
• Applicant was not dishonorably discharged from the United States Armed Forces
In addition to the above requirements, applicants for a CPL must prove to the State of Michigan that they have not been convicted of certain misdemeanors. Some convictions bar the applicant for 8 years and others bar the applicant for 3 years. Lists with examples of such crimes have been provided below.

A question that occasionally presents itself is whether a matter that was disposed of under HYTA, 7411, 769.4a, or 771.1 will affect a CPL license. It is my understanding is that a CPL typically will not be granted to individuals on probation, even with a deferral. These dispositions still show up on the back end of records systems for law enforcement. Moreover, my understanding is that while it is possible to get a CPL after a case disposed of with HYTA or 7411, it is less likely for a case concluded with 769.4a or 771.1. Before being granted the license, in Macomb County for example, you need to first sit before a board. Somebody who just got off probation, even with a 769.4a, may have trouble getting a CPL even though the case has been dismissed. Being that the charge tends to indicate violent behavior, it is my opinion such an individual will have more difficulty getting a CPL than someone with a 7411 deferral. Please be advised, this is just my opinion.

Nonetheless, if you believe your current or potential gun rights could be jeopardized you should engage counsel immediately. Deferrals, reductions, and dismissals could be helpful in reducing the time that you are ineligible for a CPL. On the following page we have provided crimes that make applicants ineligible for a CPL.
Continue reading ›

Possible Felony Prosecution for Retail Fraud/Shoplifting Offenses Pursuant to Michigan’s New Organized Retail Crime Statute Effective March 31, 2013

April 1, 2013 | Abdo Law Firm

The crime of retail fraud or shoplifting is ordinarily charged not greater than a misdemeanor unless the value of the property involved is $1,000.00 or more.

Effective March 31, 2013, Michigan passed a law that will arm retail establishments and prosecutors with the ability to charge shoplifters with a felony regardless of the value of the property involved. The new law makes it a crime to engage in certain listed conduct which is now called Organized Retail Crime. Therefore, even if a person takes a pack of chewing gum, a felony charge can be supported if other circumstances are present!

The new offense, Organized retail crime, is a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 5 years or a fine of $5,000.00, or both.