The Wright Firm's Weblog

Michael Jackson’s Doc Found Guilty!

After nine hours of deliberation, a California jury found Dr. Conrad Murray guilty of involuntary manslaughter for the death of pop icon Michael Jackson.  The verdict was the culmination of a two-year trial.  Dr. Murray’s defense attorneys are reportedly not shocked by the verdict, but plan to appeal the conviction.  The defense counsel are now focused on keeping Dr. Murray from being placed in the general prison population for his own safety, due to the high-profile nature of the case.  The sentencing phase of trial begins November 29^th, and Murray could face up to four years in prison. 

Legally speaking, it’s important to note that Murray is NOT being convicted of murdering Michael Jackson.  Under California law, “involuntary manslaughter” is an accidental killing that happens under particular circumstances, while “murder” generally involves an intentional killing. 

Texas law makes a similar distinction between intentional and accidental killings.  Under the Texas Penal Code, if a person kills someone by acting recklessly (meaning that the killer consciously ignored the risks of his/her behavior) or with criminal negligence (meaning that the killer should have been aware of the risks of his behavior), then the killer will probably be guilty of “manslaughter” or “criminally negligent homicide” instead of “murder”.

Have you been accused of a crime and need help understanding the charges and your options?  The Wright Firm is here to help you!  Give us a call at (972) 353-4600 or check us out on the web at www.thewrightlawyers.com. 

 

Off the Menu!

Prisoners on Texas’s death row will no longer be able to specially order their last meal.  The executive director of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ) has released a statement that effective immediately, an inmate’s last meal will be the same as the meal served to every other prisoner in the unit.

 

The policy change is in response to concerns expressed by Senate Criminal Justice Committee Chair John Whitmire.  In a letter to the director of TDCJ, Senator Whitmire stated that he had long been concerned by the practice of giving death row inmates whatever they want to order - particularly, as some inmate-requested meals in the past have been excessive to the point of ridiculousness. A specific example given is the last meal of Lawrence Brewer, the man convicted of the Jasper, Texas, death-by-dragging of James Byrd, Jr.  Brewer reportedly requested (and then failed to eat) the following menu on the taxpayer dime:

• 2 chicken fried steaks
• A triple meat bacon cheeseburger
• A cheese omelet
• Large bowl of fried okra
• Three fajitas
• A pint of Blue Bell ice cream
• A pound of barbecue, and
• Half a loaf of white bread

 

Supporters of the policy change believe it’s a win for rationality (why should a murder be treated to a personal feast?) and for the TDCJ’s budget.  Detractors find it harsh if not cruel to deny a condemned person’s last request.

 

Original article featuring a slide show of famous last meals can be found here: http://blog.chron.com/texaspolitics/2011/09/senate-criminal-justice-chair-enough-is-enough-on-last-meals-for-death-row-inmates/#1133-1

 

For information about Texas law contact The Wright Firm, L.L.P. at 972-353-4600 or visit our website at www.thewightlawyers.com.

 

Up to Speed!

As of September 1, 2011, many state highways are getting an upgrade in speed limit.  The Texas legislature passed several new traffic-related laws in this legislative session, the speed limit increase being among the lot.  In some parts of the state, drivers will now be allowed to tear up the black top at as high as 85 miles per hour.  This blogger has not heard official word as to whether the new speed limit laws will have an effect on Dallas County’s (incredibly frustrating) 60 mph limits.

Detractors of the new speed limits cite the increase in cost of commute due to lower fuel efficiency at higher speeds, as well as a rise in gasoline consumption as the basis of their nay-saying.  The rest of us just can’t hear them over the sound of our engines revving.

Original article from the Dallas Morning News can be found here: http://www.dallasnews.com/news/transportation/20110828-speed-limits-rise-under-new-texas-traffic-laws.ece?action=reregister

For a discussion of potential pitfalls of the law see here: http://abcnews.go.com/Business/texas-moves-raise-speed-limit-85-mph/story?id=13319173

For information on Texas law contact The Wright Firm, L.L.P. at 972-353-4600 or visit our website at www.thewrightlawyers.com 

Gettin’ the Loot!

After London was rocked by four days of rioting, looting and fires, police have now charged the 1000^th person for participation in the mayhem.  The acting police chief is urging citizens to turn in anyone they believe to be associated with the rioting and not to, “…let them get away with it.”  Can it ever be legal to loot?

 

Well, the short answer is surprisingly “Yes” but only under very limited circumstances.  Most jurisdictions recognize the defense of “necessity” to a criminal charge; in this instance, looting is criminally considered theft.  The basic premise of a necessity defense is that the accused had no choice but to break the law in order to protect himself and others from death or serious bodily harm.

 

So, if a looter took a baseball bat to save his life from being ending by a gang of rioters, necessity may be a plausible defense.  On the other hand, if a looter takes a 50-inch plasma TV because he thinks he’ll die if he misses an episode of The Real Housewives… not so much.

 

The Texas Penal Code does recognize the defense of necessity if three conditions are met (see TPC §9.22):

1) you reasonably believe your conduct is immediately necessary to avoid imminent harm;

2) the urgency of avoiding the harm clearly outweighs the damage caused by breaking the law; and

3) the actual law you broke doesn’t specifically exclude using the necessity defense.

 

Bottom line, unless you are stealing a shotgun to protect your family from the Zombie Apocalypse (link 1) (link 2), better not go looting.

 

For more on this, see original article on Necessity here: http://criminallawnewsnow.com/2011/08/is-it-ever-legal-to-loot/

 

Article on arrests in the London riots here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44172456

 

For more information on Texas law contact The Wright Firm, L.L.P. at 972-353-4600 or visit our website at www.thewrightlawyers.com . 

 

Swatting?

In the U.S. and Canada, police agencies are seeing a rise in a type of hoax dubbed “swatting”.  Here’s how it works:  1) a caller reports a hostage situation to the police department [i.e. “I’ve killed two people and I have hostages!”], 2) SWAT Team shows up at reported hostage situation guns a-blazing, 3) no actual hostage situation is going on [ i.e. empty house/building, or prank victim’s home], 4) caller and his accomplices enjoy their “bragging rights”.

The typical swatter is a male in his 20’s or 30’s, and swatter groups tend to be behind multiple swatting hoaxes.  Even worse, when swatter groups receive media attention or brag about their exploits, police agencies have noted that it tends to spawn “copy-swats”. 

While these guys apparently find swatting quite amusing, they can face federal charges of conspiracy (max. penalty 5 yrs in prison) and fraud (max. 20 years in prison). Diverting police officers away from fighting actual crime puts innocent people in danger and is a massive waste of tax payer dollars. The Feds are not taking these offenses lightly.

If you are thinking swatting might be a good prank to pull on someone – don’t do it.  If you’ve gotten into other kinds of trouble with the law, give The Wright Firm a call at (972) 353-4600 or check us out on the web at www.thewrightlawyers.com!

Original article can be found here: http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2011/08/10/SWAT-teams-responding-to-swatting-hoaxes/UPI-31561313022441/

 

Casey Anthony Found Not Guilty!

There was no shortage of surprise across the country as the verdict was read in Casey Anthony’s trial.  Anthony, the much maligned mother of the tragically deceased Caylee Anthony, was found not guilty of her daughter’s murder.  Supporters of Anthony who believed she was being framed for Caylee’s murder are in many ways as shocked by the verdict as detractors who believed her to be guilty.  Even though jurors had been imported from nearby Tampa Bay and sequestered for the entire proceedings, there was a collective sense surrounding the trial that Casey Anthony had already been convicted of the murder in the Court of Public Opinion.

Public opinion aside, in the Florida legal system a criminal defendant is presumed to be not guilty until he or she is proven guilty in a court of law.  Same goes (or is supposed to go) in any criminal court in the United States.  The “not guilty” verdict means that the 12 jurors found that the prosecution had not PROVEN that Casey Anthony murdered her daughter. 

Casey Anthony was found guilty by the jury of four counts of providing false information to police investigators.  She will face sentencing for those convictions Thursday morning.  She could be sentenced at most to four years in prison (one year for each count).

Are you facing your own legal battle in criminal court?  The Wright Firm is here to help!  Give us a call at (972) 353-4600 or check us out on the web at www.thewrightlawyers.com. 

 

Texas “No Refusal” Weekend

The standard rule in Texas, when it comes to drinking and driving, is that anyone driving with a blood alcohol level of .08 or higher is considered legally impaired and will be issued a DWI. Typically, when a driver is pulled over and the police suspect the driver has been drinking, the driver will be asked to perform several tasks, known collectively as a field sobriety test. In addition, the driver will be asked to take a breathalyzer. Generally, the driver will be allowed to refuse the breathalyzer but will be penalized for the refusal with a 180-day automatic suspension of driving privileges.

But, this weekend the State of Texas has implemented a “no refusal” weekend for the Fourth of July holiday. While several cities across the United States have implemented “no refusal” weekends in the past, Texas is the first state to issue a state-wide policy. Police officers attribute the “no refusal” mandate based on evidence that the Fourth of July weekend is the number one holiday for alcohol-related fatal crashes. Last year’s Fourth of July weekend produced a total of 337,000 car crashes in Texas alone.

The “no refusal” weekend begins at 6 p.m. on Friday, July 1, and ends at 6 a.m. on Tuesday, July 5. Under this policy, anyone suspected of driving a car or boat while intoxicated and who refuses to take a breathalyzer will have a search warrant issued to them and their blood drawn. So a word to the wise – enjoy your holiday weekend but be smart, safe and don’t drink and drive.

For more information contact The Wright Firm, L.L.P. at 972-353-4600 (phones answered 24 hours a day) or visit our website at www.thewrightlawyers.com.

 

Mavs Parade: Be Careful of Public Intoxication!

Public Intoxication charges can happen to the best of us, just ask Deshawn Stevenson. Who is actually considered innocent until proven otherwise!  Simply put public intoxication in Texas means you are in a public place while intoxicated to the degree you may endanger yourself or someone else. Public Intoxication is punishable by a fine of up to $500 and usually requires 4-12 hours in jail at the time of the incident. While public intoxication is a Class C Misdemeanor it will have a significant impact on your record. A conviction could affect the way that police deal with you in the future. Every time you are pulled over police officers will see that you have a public intoxication conviction. A police officer will surely inspect you far more closely every time you are pulled over specifically to determine whether he/she thinks that you are driving while intoxicated. If you find yourself in this situation it is important that you hire an experienced attorney.

For more information contact The Wright Firm, L.L.P. at 972-353-4600 (phones answered 24 hours a day) or visit our website at www.thewrightlawyers.com.

 

 

KNOCK, LISTEN, THEN BREAK THE DOOR DOWN!

In an 8-1 vote the United States Supreme Court reversed a Kentucky ruling that excluded evidence gather after police officers entered Mr. Hollis King’s apartment without a search warrant. Police officers claimed they smelled marijuana coming from the apartment and “feared” that Mr. King was trying to get rid of incriminating evidence. Officers knocked on the door and thought they heard noises that indicated that whoever was inside was trying to get rid of incriminating evidence. The Supreme Court explained that Mr. King’s constitutional rights were not violated because the police acted reasonably and those that attempt to destroy evidence have only themselves to blame. In her dissenting opinion Justice Ginsburg said her colleagues were giving police an easy way to routinely avoid getting warrants in drug cases. She states: “police may now knock, listen then break the door down, never mind that they had ample time to obtain a warrant.”

For information on Texas criminal law contact The Wright Firm, L.L.P. at 972-353-4600 or visit our website at www.thewrightlawyers.com. 

 

Texas Social Host Liability: Don't Serve Alcohol to Minors!

Social Host Liability is the legal term for the criminal and civil responsibility of a person who furnishes alcohol to a guest. In most cases, social hosts in Texas are not responsible for guests who drink too much at their home. However, there are exceptions, a big one being when a host serves alcohol to minors.  If a homeowner provides alcohol to minors or allows minors to consume alcohol at their residence, they are liable for any injuries caused by the intoxicated minor. That is exactly what happened in Georgetown, Texas to Donna Crites. Mrs. Crites was sentenced to three years of probation and one week in jail for providing alcohol to her underage son and his friends to make about 200 gelatin shots. Five of teenagers who had been drinking at the Crites’ residence were seriously injured in a car accident. The driver told investigators that he consumed as many as 40 of the shots. Mrs. Crites plead guilty to five counts of purchasing or furnishing alcohol to minors over the incident.

For more information and/or a free initial consultation about social host responsibility and under-aged drunk driving contact The Wright Firm, L.L.P. at 972-353-4600 (phones answered 24 hours a day) or visit our website at www.thewrightlawyers.com.  Meet with one of our criminal defense attorneys in Dallas, Denton, Lewisville, Frisco, Plano, or Ft. Worth, Texas.

This Site is a public resource for general information about The Wright Firm, L.L.P. and Texas Law.  Nothing in this Site should be construed by you as a source of legal advice. You should not rely or act upon the contents of this Site without seeking advice from your own attorney. Use and access to this Site or any materials or information provided on this Site does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and The Wright Firm, L.L.P. or any of its attorneys,  nor is this Site a substitute for legal advice. Any information submitted by you by The Wright Firm, L.L.P. or its attorneys via this Site, an email, or any form of social media communication will not be considered an attorney-client communication or otherwise be treated as confidential or privileged in the absence of an executed Engagement Agreement between you and The Wright Firm, L.L.P. or its attorneys.