The parents of two children allegedly found in ‘deplorable conditions’ were arrested in San Jacinto, according to the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department. Deputies and Child Protective Services (CPS) arrived at the 1600 block of Santa Fe Avenue after receiving a report about child abuse. The report to CPS came from an employee of the children’s school district. Authorities said they found two children “deliberately confined” to a room under “deplorable conditions” without access to a restroom or basic necessities. Deputies believe the children lived in that condition for more than one year. It was determined that this confinement occurred only during night time.

The children’s parents, Emily Tardy, 29, and Steven Crane, 38, were arrested for alleged child abuse. The Riverside County District Attorney’s Office decided not to charge the couple with felony child abuse and instead charge them with misdemeanor child endangerment. Both are being held on $35,000 bail. They each pleaded not guilty to all counts and are scheduled to be back in court on Oct. 9.

California Penal Code 273(a) – Child Endangerment

A search is underway for two missing boys who detectives believe were abducted by their mother at the end of August. Sage, 14 and Isaac Cook, 9, reportedly visited their mother Faye Ku in California. The boys live in Washington State with their father, who has had full custody since the couple divorced in 2009. Ku allegedly gave her ex-husband a “supervised visit” court order to force him to allow the boys to visit her. She left a written letter at her home blaming her ex-husband for trying to control her and her children. The boys were last seen at Los Angeles International Airport on August 28.

According to court documents, this is not the first time Ku has tried to take her boys. Back in June, she was arrested and charged with custodial interference for trying to board a flight with her boys to Taiwan.

What is Custodial Interference?

According to a San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) report, the San Diego region’s overall crime rate, violent-crime rate, and property-crime rate has remained relatively stable, and is even down 1 percent. While some categories of violent crime showed a few upticks, it is telling that the crime rate in the region has remained stable given the legislative changes enacted in the recent years that have allowed ex-offenders returning to local communities. A total of 5,335 violent crimes (those involving homicide, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault) were reported to local police in the region between January and June of 2015; an average of 29 per day. Domestic violence incidents are also up 4% from 2014.

While property crimes such as burglaries are reported to have dropped by approximately 13% throughout the San Diego region, the La Jolla area has seen an increase in crime. Reported robberies in La Jolla have doubled from five to 10, and rapes have increased from zero to eight incidents the first half of the year. Thefts over $400 and motor vehicle thefts have also increased from 49 to 54 incidents.

What is Robbery?

In California, Penal Code 211 defines the crime of robbery as taking personal property that belongs to someone else from the victim’s person or immediate presence, and against the victim’s will, through the use of force or fear.

Robbery is different from theft in that it must occur when the victim/property owner is present during the crime. The crime of robbery can also occur during a burglary of a home if the residents happen to be inside at the time. Robbery is always a felony under California law.

Robbery is considered a first degree felony if:

  • It is committed against any driver or passenger of a vehicle
  • It takes place in an inhabited structure
  • It takes place at an ATM after someone has just used it

It is punishable by up to six years imprisonment, a fine of $10,000, or felony formal probation.

Robbery in the second degree is committed whenever it does not meet the definition of first degree robbery. It is punishable by up to five years imprisonment, felony probation, and a $10,000 fine. Continue reading

Earlier this month, the news reported Salinas Councilman Jose Castaneda’s new slew of legal problems, and this time they go beyond whether or not he is legally holding two elected offices.  Salinas police announced that Castaneda was arrested and charged with kidnapping, false imprisonment, and felony domestic violence. According to reports, Castaneda was waiting for his ex-girlfriend when she arrived at her home on Friday night. He allegedly forced the woman into a van, drove away to another location, and held her hostage for several hours. During that time, police believe he assaulted her, leaving her with the bruises that led to the felony charge of domestic violence. Castaneda allegedly eventually released the woman and allowed her to walk home.

Castaneda and his attorney, Anthony Prince, eventually contacted police and said he would turn himself in to police. They asked police if it could wait until after a press conference Castaneda had scheduled for Thursday morning. Police took him into custody at the press conference. If convicted of the felony charges, California law would disallow Castaneda from holding any state office, and he would also face the legal ramifications associated with those charges. His bail is currently set for $100,000.

California False Imprisonment Law

A bill by state Sen. Patricia Bates (R-Laguna Beach) that would increase prison sentences for high-risk sex offenders who tamper with their electronic tracking devices is reported to be headed to Governor Jerry Brown’s desk for approval. The bill was inspired by the Orange County serial killings of four women who disappeared from high-prostitute areas of Santa Ana and Anaheim. The subsequent investigation showed that the two men involved, Steve Gordon and Franc Cano, twice cut off their monitoring devices and fled to Alabama and Las Vegas.

Bates’ bill would make it a felony for the most egregious sexual offenders to remove their GPS monitors, with prison terms for that violation up to three years. Eligible crimes include rape, spousal rape, and rape of a child. The bill was passed by the California Assembly and now awaits Jerry Brown’s signature to become California state law.

Definition of Rape

Back in April, we discussed the beating of Francis Pusok as he was trying to escape from police on horseback in the Southern California desert. Now, the three California deputies from San Bernardino County, Nicholas Downey, Michael Phelps, and Charles Foster will face criminal charges in the beating of Pusok. Each were charged with one count of assault by a public officer, and all three deputies are scheduled to appear in court for arraignment on Sept. 8. If convicted, each deputy faces between 16 months to three years in prison. They all remain on paid administrative leave pending the outcome.

Pusok’s attorney James Terrell believes eight of the 10 deputies should have been charged (not just the three involved in the incident). The other seven deputies who responded are not being criminally charged because of what was said on the voice recorders that the deputies carry on their belts. The helicopter footage that caught the incident indicated that Pusok appeared to have been kicked 17 times, punched 37 times, and struck with batons four times, a review of the video showed, and 13 blows appeared to be to the head. Mr. Pusok did file a lawsuit in response to the beating and settled it with San Bernardino County for $650,000. There has also been an internal probe of 10 deputies, along with an FBI civil rights probe.

Help for Police Misconduct

California recently passed a bill to protect undocumented immigrants who are the victims of crimes from being deported. California has the largest population of undocumented immigrants in the country at an estimated 2.45 million. The California Assembly passed the Immigrant Victims of Crime Equity Act, sponsored by Assembly Speaker Toni Atkins of San Diego and Senate President pro Tempore Kevin de León of Los Angeles. The bill is now headed to Governor Jerry Brown for signing. If signed by the governor, it will become state law.

S.B. 674 requires local and state law enforcement agencies to sign certifications for qualified immigrant crime victims when they have been helpful to the investigation of crimes like sexual assault and domestic violence. The certifications are prerequisites to an application for a Victim of Crime “U-Visa,” which is issued by the federal government to prevent deportation of victims of specific crimes who have been helpful to the investigation or prosecution. S.B. 674 also provides relief for victims of domestic violence. The intent of the Bill is to curb crime, since victims of crime tend to not report it or cooperate with law enforcement if they are in the country illegally. The bill is part of the sweeping Immigrants Shape California legislative package.

Under federal law, being in the country illegally is grounds for deportation. If S.B. 674 is passed, it would mean that victims of sexual crimes and domestic violence in California would not face potential deportation for reporting the crime.

As the focus on ‘border security’ has increased in the platforms of presidential candidates for the 2016 election, the federal government has also ramped up its efforts to deport immigrants who have committed crimes or pose a threat to public safety. This September, immigration authorities in Southern California arrested more than 240 people with criminal records during a four-day sting. Los Angeles County accounted for the largest number of arrests with 99, followed by Orange County at 55, San Bernardino County with 43, Riverside County with 24, Santa Barbara County with 20, and San Luis Obispo County with three. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement authorities said over half of those arrested had felony convictions or multiple misdemeanor convictions. Eight out of 10 are from Mexico. Those who are not criminally prosecuted will be placed in deportation proceedings. The sting comes as the federal government butts heads with local state governments that have resisted in cooperating on immigration enforcement.

California Immigration Enforcement

California does not require state or local law enforcement officers to check the immigration status during traffic stops or similar circumstances. Additionally, California allows for in-state tuition for illegal aliens in California-funded state universities, driver’s licenses for those here illegally, and state-funded healthcare for children. Additionally, due to a statewide law passed in 2013, local law enforcement officials are prohibited from detaining immigrants for longer than necessary on minor offenses so that they can be turned over to federal officials for possible deportation. This year a bill has been introduced to allow work permits to farmworkers living in the U.S. illegally.

In lieu of the start of the school year for many college and school-aged students, the Placer County Sheriff’s Office in Northern California has received a $50,000 grant from the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (“ABC”) for programs to combat underage drinking and alcohol sales to minors. The Roseville Police Department will participate in the grant, assisting the Sheriff’s office in providing training regarding alcohol-related crimes and their effects for school staff members, parents, students, and the community. The Sheriff’s Office plans to target ABC licensed stores that sell alcoholic beverages to minors and obviously intoxicated adult patrons. Minor-decoy and shoulder-tap operations also will be conducted countywide in an effort to reduce minors’ access to alcohol.

Counties throughout the state are cracking down on alcohol sales to minors.  Earlier this summer, an undercover operation across the state called Operation “Shoulder Tap” led to the arrest or citation of over 400 people in San Diego for purchasing alcohol for a minor.

Minors in Possession of Alcohol

As I mentioned last month, the recent Supreme Court ruling upholding the constitutionality of a drug called Midalozam for use in lethal injection has brought the debate about the death penalty in California back into the spotlight. Back in 2006, a district judge stopped all death-row executions in the state (citing the delays in the system as being unconstitutional), and now California has the largest death row backlog in the nation. Now the topic of California’s death penalty has come up again – this time not in the context of the type of drugs that may be used, but to the original debate of wait time that an inmate faces while on death row in the state.

Last year, U.S. District Judge Cormac Carney explicitly ruled that California’s death penalty system was unconstitutional in Jones v. Chappel, smiting the long wait that comes before execution. California Attorney General Kamila Harris appealed this decision and seeks to overturn it. As a result, on August 31, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals will hear the oral arguments over the constitutionality of the death penalty in Jones v. Davis.

The Delayed Process

Contact Information