In Orange County, California, at least 34,646 people have tested positive for COVID-19. Sadly, 566 of our residents have died from illnesses linked to the virus. Nearly 500,000 Californians have contracted the coronavirus, and 8,445 have succumbed statewide. At the Law Offices of Katie Walsh, we would like to express our condolences to everyone impacted by the pandemic.

We hope that you are taking preventive measures each day to safeguard your health during these challenging times.

Nearly every aspect of our day-to-day lives is different from before the outbreak. Tens of millions of Americans are out of work. According to the Brookings Institute, more than one in five households in the United States with children age 12 and under are food insecure. Financial hardship is leaving kids hungry; desperation is rampant throughout the country.

Spending most, if not all, of the day at home due to social distancing and “stay at home” orders is the new normal for a majority of the population. As a result, the way businesses, organizations, government systems, and the legal system operate is changing before our eyes.

It’s been nearly four months since an emergency order was issued, allowing courthouses across California to close to the public. An untold number of court cases are postponed as a result. While most Californians are unable to visit Orange County courts, it’s possible to handle pressing legal matters over the internet thanks to a new online portal.

Orange County Court User Portal

The Superior Court of California – County of Orange – has consolidated many of its website functions, allowing citizens to attend to traffic infractions and lower-level criminal cases, The Orange County Register reports. With the exception of jury trials, most low-level offense requirements can be handled online.

Orange County residents can turn to the Court User Portal to take care of payments or set up payment plans, submit electronic correspondence to the court, reserve a court date, or set up email or text reminders for future hearing or payment dates. You can also use the portal to search for cases or citations.

Court facilities are a prime example of where large groups of people gather. Avoiding large crowds is essential to reducing the spread of COVID-19.

“The portal will provide an essential channel for access to justice, especially during the challenging times of COIVD-19 when we must maintain social distancing,” said Orange County Superior Court Presiding Judge, Kirk Nakamura.

In order to utilize the tool, you will have to create a My Court Portal account to access the dashboard. Please double-check everything you submit to the portal; the court is not liable for errors or omissions or any of the information provided.

Orange County Juvenile Defense Attorney

If your child is facing legal challenges, please contact the Law Offices of Katie Walsh. As a former prosecutor, Attorney Walsh has the expertise to advocate for your family and help bring about the best possible outcome. You will be pleased to know that the courts are permitting attorneys to appear by video or in-person for all or most misdemeanors amid the pandemic—sparing clients from exposure risks.

As the world remains fixated on seeing the global pandemic come to an end, the topic of police brutality in the United States is once again at the forefront of the public’s attention. A recent swath of the killing of unarmed black civilians has caught international attention and led to protests across the nation.

The disproportionate shootings involving people of color has forced millions of Americans to set aside their worries over coronavirus and rethink policing in America. People of color – both teenagers and adults – are far more likely to have run-ins with law enforcement and the criminal justice system.

It’s not just adults in an uproar about what is perceived as unfair treatment of blacks and Latinos. A large number of students have been affected by the role law enforcement plays in their day-to-day lives. The “school-to-prison pipeline” continues to be a subject of the utmost importance, and we must continue taking steps to end this phenomenon. Again, it’s a trend that affects young minorities at significantly higher rates than their white peers.

In California, students have come together to demand this change in their school districts. In several major cities, students are imploring school boards to put a stop to the presence of police in their schools, EdSource reports. They would like to see fewer police and more counselors on campus.

“Police feel like a threat to students, especially to black and brown students. Black and brown students are intimidated by police,” said Ashantee Polk, a high school senior in Los Angeles and a member of Students Deserve Justice, a group of students across the Los Angeles Unified School District.

Police-Free Schools in California

Student resource officers are meant to make students feel safer. However, research shows that having police officers in schools can lead to unfortunate outcomes for black and Latino students.

Data shows that young blacks and Latinos are arrested and disciplined more often than their white peers, often for minor offenses such as willful defiance. In many cases, interactions with student resource officers is a teenager’s first introduction to the criminal justice system—the school-to-prison pipeline.

A more significant investment in student support services could provide young people with resources that will keep them on a path that steers them away from courtrooms and institutions. Pressure from both students and community groups could lead to significant changes in Los Angeles, Oakland, Sacramento, and San Francisco in the near future. That’s not to say police-free campuses will be the future, but change could be on the horizon.

“We need to have standards for school resource officers,” said California State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond. “Those standards mean that we should never, ever at any school, expect a police officer to be the dean of students or a disciplinarian who disciplines a student for doing things that students do. There should be no criminalization of students for engaging in student behavior.”

Orange County Juvenile Lawyer

Remember, a young school aged child or teenager needs an advocate as soon as a serious issue comes up! Often times the school’s first priority is to protect the school and the school district, not the child. As a former prosecutor, Attorney Katie Walsh has the expertise to help young people who find themselves in trouble with the law. Please contact The Law Office of Katie Walsh today to learn more about how she can advocate for your family.

At the Law Offices of Katie Walsh, our thoughts and prayers go out to all the families impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. We understand that 10,030 Californians have tested positive for the deadly coronavirus that is sweeping across the United States and the entire planet. Thus far, 216 people have succumbed to the virus in California, and at least 51,485 individuals have died globally. Public health experts project that many more will fall ill, and an untold number will perish from the disease.

We hope that you are following every precaution to protect your health and safety. It’s of the utmost importance that you heed the recommendations of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), as well as local and state officials.

At this moment, New York has the most confirmed cases of COVID-19 and casualties. However, California Governor Gavin Newsom’s team of public health experts warn that the Golden State could see the most significant number of confirmed cases in the end.

On March 18th, 2020, Gov. Newsom wrote The White House asking for aid, and shared the projections, CNN reports. In response, the U.S.N.S Mercy was sent to the coast of Los Angeles to support local hospitals. Mercy’s sole purpose is medical in nature, and it can accommodate 1,000 hospital beds. The Mercy’s mission is not to treat COVID-19 patients. They are treating patients with other health conditions or injuries, so the hospitals have more open beds for coronavirus patients.

“We project that roughly 56 percent of our population — 25.5 million people — will be infected with the virus over an eight-week period,” wrote Gov. Newsom.

We can only hope that Newsom’s projections don’t become a reality. Even still, life as we know it, is vastly different from just a few weeks ago, including in the criminal justice system.

Orange County Superior Courts Close

California Supreme Court Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye issued an emergency order allowing courthouses across the state to close for the time being facilities to the public, KCAL 9 reports. In response, all Orange County Superior Court system courthouses closed last Monday.

The courts were to remain closed until March 30th; however, the closure was extended. Now, all court facilities in the county are closed to the PUBLIC until at least April 24th, 2020, according to One Legal. The same is true in other counties as well; all civil and criminal trials are suspended through April 16th at all 38 courthouses in Los Angeles County.

On March 27th, Superior Court of California County of Orange issued a press release which stated:

“The Orange County Superior Court is closed to the public, with minimal exceptions for time sensitive matters, or matters pertaining to the safety and security of the community.”

Given the growing number of confirmed cases throughout the state, it’s highly plausible that the criminal justice system will essentially remain at a standstill for much longer. Hopefully, if Californians follow the public health protocols, we will be able to flatten the curve of new cases and save countless lives.

Orange County Juvenile Defense Attorney

We hope everyone stays healthy and safe across the state and beyond. Please contact the Law Offices of Katie Walsh if your son or daughter is encountering legal troubles. Attorney Walsh has the experience to advocate for your family and help bring about a favorable outcome. Should you have any questions about a pending case, please visit our COVID-19 page.

On numerous occasions, we have covered Senate Bill 190: Ending Juvenile Administrative Fees (SB-190), a piece of legislation that abolished entire categories of monetary sanctions in the juvenile legal system and a subset of fees for young people in the adult legal system. Signed into law by former Governor Jerry Brown in 2017, the landmark law went into effect on January 1, 2018.

SB-190 has several facets that are meant to take some of the financial burden off young people who are in legal trouble and their families. The bipartisan legislation prohibits California counties from charging fees to parents and guardians for their child’s:

• Detention
• Representation by Counsel
• Electronic Monitoring
• Probation Supervision
• Drug Testing

The bill also removed each county’s authority to charge young people, ages 18–21, in the adult system for home detention, electronic monitoring, and drug testing. Senators Holly J. Mitchell and Ricardo Lara wrote SB 190 to:

“eliminate a source of financial harm to some of the state’s most vulnerable families, support the reentry of youth back into their homes and communities, and reduce the likelihood that youth will recidivate.”

Failure to Comply with SB-190

The Berkeley Law Policy Advocacy Clinic conducted a study on behalf of the Western Center on Law & Poverty to give a status report on the implementation of SB-190, according to The Crime Report. Study co-authors Stephanie Campos-Bui and Jess Bartholow identified 22 counties in violation of law by continuing to charge fees, demand past fees, and bill families through the child support system.

While the revelation is concerning, the status report did have some positive findings. SB-190 did not waive previously assessed fees; however, the authors write that “36 counties voluntarily discharged or stopped collecting them, relieving hundreds of thousands of families of more than $237 million.”

The report indicates that the bill provided California families with hundreds of millions of dollars in relief. Before SB-190 went into effect, “families with youth in the juvenile legal system had more than $374 million in outstanding fee assessments.”

Researchers identified the worst offenders still pursuing legal fees from families with youths in the juvenile legal system. The five counties failing to comply the most are:

• San Diego
• Orange
• Riverside
• Tulare
• Stanislaus

The study authors recommend that counties stop assessing all SB 190-prohibited fees through child support orders and to young people ages 18–21 in criminal court; counties should voluntarily stop collecting and discharge all previously assessed SB; counties should notify young people and families of all SB 190 fee relief and update all SB 190-related internal- and external-facing fee materials.

On the state level, The Berkeley Law Policy Advocacy Clinic recommends that the California Department of Social Services require local child support agencies to comply with SB 190. They add that the California Legislature and Governor should enact new legislation that waives all previously assessed fees.

California Juvenile Law Attorney

Attorney Katie Walsh has extensive experience in the juvenile legal system and previously worked as a prosecutor; she is in a unique position to advocate for your family and help your child achieve the best possible outcome in his or her case. Please contact The Law Offices of Katie Walsh today for a free consultation.

In 1996, the California Division of Juvenile Justice, the state’s youth correctional system, housed over 10,000 children and young adults (ages 12 to 25), according to the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice.

Today, we see a very different picture of juvenile justice in the Golden State. Thanks to several criminal justice reforms and the tireless of countless individuals, rehabilitation is now California’s watchword.

The number of young people housed in juvenile detention centers had fallen to 627, as of June 2018, The San Francisco Chronicle reports. While most people will find this news uplifting, lawmakers still have far to go in ensuring that all children are afforded the same benefits.

Young African Americans and Latinos are over-represented in both arms of the criminal justice system—juvenile and adult. Of the 71,923 juvenile arrests in 2015, black and Latino youths made up 88% of those tried as adults, according to a study from the California Department of Justice.

On numerous occasions, we have written about Proposition 57 on this blog. The legislation took power to try children as adults away from prosecutors in 2016. However, black and Latino youths are still tried as adults at the same rate.

Probation Helps and Hurts Young People

While fewer young people are locked up, there are more than 39,000 youth on probation in California, according to the article. Probation gives kids more options, but the likelihood of violating terms is high. Violations often result in incarceration.

“Probation is a hidden secret of the juvenile justice system,” said Nate Balis, Director of the Juvenile Justice Strategy Group for The Annie E. Casey Foundation. “The proportion of kids put in probation remains the same year after year. It is quite similar to what it looked like with the overall approach in the 1990s. One thing to change is dramatically narrowing who ends up on probation. Kids with first offenses like shoplifting can end up on probation. We must be more discerning and divert far more youth from juvenile justice system.”

Probation can be successful if young people are supported along the way. Expecting teenagers to fall in line after an arrest is wishful if they lack the resources to make necessary changes. We have to remember that teenagers who get in trouble with the law rarely come from stable homes. Bad influences are aplenty inside the house and out.

Reforms are only beneficial when they are in tandem with investments in the community. Diversion programs can give young people the tools to get back on track, stay in school, and avoid incarceration down the road.

California Juvenile Defense Attorney

Parents with a son or daughter facing legal trouble or school expulsion can benefit from seeking the help of juvenile defense expert. Having an experienced advocate in your family’s corner can pay off significantly.

Please contact The Law Offices of Katie Walsh for a free consultation and to learn more about how we can help you overcome your legal challenges.

Youth incarceration is a significant topic of discussion in California from one end of the state to the other. The question of how to best serve young people who struggle is one that many individuals are trying to answer. A primary goal is to keep children out of detention centers and in the classroom.

Across the United States, youth crime rates are falling. Last week, we discussed some of the reasons behind the unprecedented drop in serious crime committed by minors. After the San Francisco Chronicle published a report bringing the trend to light, lawmakers in Northern California are taking action.

In response to The Chronicle’s reporting, three San Francisco supervisors are aiming for the juvenile hall in the city, the S.F. Chronicle reports. Hillary Ronen, Shamann Walton, and Matt Haney are drafting legislation that would close the city’s detention center and all but end the practice of jailing youths. If the lawmaker’s efforts prove successful, it will make San Francisco the only city in California without a juvenile hall.

Meredith Desautels, a staff attorney the Youth Law Center, tells The Chronicle the proposed move is in line with current research. Studies show that incarceration is harmful to young people. She said that closing juvenile hall “would provide the shock to the system that we need to change our thinking about how to approach youth who have gotten into trouble.”

San Francisco’s juvenile hall has 150 beds, according to the article. However, usually fewer than 50 youths are held inside at one time. The money spent on keeping the center open and housing youths could better be spent on innovative programs instead. Last year, the annual cost of housing a child reached $266,000.

“We’re done with jailing kids,” said Supervisor Ronen.

Meanwhile, In Los Angeles

While SF Supervisors have their sights on closing juvenile hall, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors have questions about unspent state funding intended to reduce juvenile delinquency, KNBC reports. Some $79 million sits in reserve, while valuable programs lack operating funds, says Supervisor Janice Hahn.

“It is unacceptable that nonprofits dedicated to supporting youth are underfunded while millions of dollars meant for them are going unused,” said Hahn. “We need immediate clarity on these funds and a plan to get them out into the community as quickly as possible.”

A motion was put forth – co-authored by Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas – to expedite a scheduled audit of the problem, according to the article. Supervisor Hahn also points out that the Probation Department’s budget doesn’t show signs of making the necessary moves toward prevention and community-based interventions.

It seems that the Probation Department is at odds with the Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council (JJCC) which oversees state funding. The latter has a plan to dedicate more resources toward county services to community-based organizations, the article reports. The former’s budget plan does not match the JJCC’s.

Please take a moment to watch a short video on the subject here.

Southern California Juvenile Law Attorney

At the Law Offices of Katie Walsh, we specialize in juvenile defense. As a former prosecutor, Attorney Walsh has a unique set of skills that she can utilize when advocating for your family. If your son or daughter is charged with a crime or is facing a school expulsion hearing, we can help your family achieve the best possible outcome. Please contact us today. (714) 351-0178

In 2014, California Gov. Jerry Brown signed a K-3 suspension ban for “disruption and defiance” infractions. Friday of last week, the California Legislature voted in favor of Senate Bill 607, authored by Sen. Nancy Skinner, D-Berkeley, to expand the ban to include suspensions through the 8th grade, EdSource reports. Sen. Skinner had initially hoped that the expansion would consist of all high-schoolers, as opposed to just K-8.

It remains unclear if Gov. Brown will get behind the bill and pen his name to the legislation; but, it’s worth noting that Brown vetoed a total K-12 “disruption and defiance” ban in 2012, only to later sign a less comprehensive ban in 2014. Brown’s previous opposition stems from his belief that state-mandated prohibitions interfere with local school district control. Local control is the cornerstone of his education policy, according to the article. The California School Boards Association and the Association of California School Administrators (ACSA) supports expanding the ban. However, the California Charter Schools Association and the California Teachers Association have taken a neutral stance.

A Dramatic Drop In Suspensions

Initially, the ACSA was opposed to including higher grade levels into the suspension ban; then, the organization learned about how racial disparities continue to be the status quo for disruption and defiance suspensions throughout the state, the article reports. The ACLU of Southern California conducted an analysis of state data and found that African-American and Latino boys received more than half of the state’s disruption and defiance suspensions during the 2016-17 school year. It’s worth noting that Black and Latino children make up only 30.7 percent of all California students.

“This wasn’t an easy decision for ACSA, but our folks are really concerned with the disparities in terms of how willful defiance suspensions are applied,” Iván Carrillo, a legislative advocate for the school administrators’ association, said. “Our membership takes a big issue with that and we want to continue to utilize other creative, research-based tools to deal with student behavior while at the same time protecting the classroom.”

When students are taken out of the class for slight infractions they are more likely to find themselves in additional trouble down the road, i.e., the school-to-prison pipeline. A more significant reliance on evidence-based restorative justice techniques could help the state for years to come.

“All the stakeholders are either supportive or neutral, which is great,” Skinner tells EdSource. “Now the question is does it meet the governor’s comfortability, which it should. The whole objective is to give kids the best chance at being successful — and kicking them out of school, even if it’s just for a few days, is not a recipe for success.”

Several municipalities have already taken the initiative and instituted their own K-12 willful defiance suspension bans, in lieu of a statewide ban. We will just have to wait and see which way Gov. Brown goes on SB 607.

Orange County Juvenile Justice

If your son or daughter is at risk of school expulsion in California, please contact The Law Offices Katie Walsh at your earliest convenience. Attorney Walsh has extensive experience handling these types of cases and can advocate on behalf of your family to safeguard your child’s rights.

Keeping young people away from the juvenile justice and adult criminal justice system is of the utmost importance. People who get into trouble with the law at a young age are at significant risk of having run-ins in the future. Young people – more often than not – do not understand that their choices can have a lasting impact on the course of their life. Education is one of the most effective ways of deterring young people from making risky decisions and helping them stay on track.

Across the country and in California, there exist outreach programs designed to enlighten young people about what can happen if they break the law, i.e., expulsion, probation, and juvenile detention. However, the people who run such programs often use fear tactics to keep young people on the straight and narrow. But, as any parent knows, adolescents are stubborn and will usually do the exact opposite of what they are told. It’s likely that many of you have heard or read about “Scared Straight.”

The ‘Scared Straight’ program targets juvenile delinquents or children at risk for criminal behavior and brings them to see the inside of a prison, according to the U.S. National Library of Medicine. The goal is that when young people understand what life is like on the “inside,” they will be deterred from future offenses. However, there is a large body of research that calls into question the efficacy of scaring children into obedience and compliance.

Law and Leadership Academy

Toward the end of July, prosecutors working within the Riverside District Attorney’s Crime Prevention Unit held a 5-day program to raise awareness about what happens within the criminal justice system, Desert Sun reports. The Law and Leadership Academy, created by Amy McKenzie in 2016, takes a different approach than Scared Straight to prevent youth crime. Instead of singling out kids who are at risk of trouble, school counselors choose students who will participate in the program because they have expressed an interest in law enforcement. McKenzie believes crime prevention can be achieved through education and community outreach.

“Community outreach and crime prevention go hand-in-hand. We feel the more transparent our office is to the community and the more we get our message out there helps deter crime,” said McKenzie.

The Center for Juvenile and Criminal Justice reports that the felony arrest rate for youth ages 10-17 was 271 per 100,000 in Riverside County in 2016. The Department of Juvenile Justice reports that within three-years, 74 percent of youth arrested in California are rearrested.

Prosecutors Mike Tripp and Hawlee Valente say that the academy is about more than getting young people excited about careers in the field of criminal justice. The goal is that participants will share their newfound wisdom with their peers back in school.

“Our hope is that they act as little ambassadors. Because not everyone gets to do this; there are adults who never get to see the inner-workings of the criminal justice system. They take this back to their school and back to their family and they get a completely different view,” Tripp said.

Juvenile Defense Attorney

Please contact The Law Offices Katie Walsh if your son or daughter is facing legal troubles. Attorney Walsh has extensive experience if the field of juvenile justice and will advocate for your family to achieve the best possible outcome.

Just over a year ago we covered a subject that is of particular importance to adolescents caught in the juvenile justice system and their families, Senate Bill 190 (SB-190). At the time, the piece of legislation which, if passed, would prohibit the collection of fees in the juvenile-justice system across the state, was before the California state legislature. In the time since the bill was approved and signed by California Governor Jerry Brown.

Fines and court fees can add up quickly even when the offense in question is relatively minor. Given that most young people do not have a source of income sans what they get from their mother and/or father, the costs of young people breaking the law tend to become the burden of parents. What’s more, debt generated from the past transgressions in one’s youth, don’t disappear upon release; some families continue to chip away at debt long after their son or daughter earn his or her freedom.

Since January 1, 2018, counties across the state have put a stop to collecting juvenile court fees per SB-190; yet, families throughout California are still whittling away at debts accrued before the law came to fruition. San Mateo County Board Supervisor David Canepa, along with former juvenile offender Daniel Casillas, are tirelessly working to end the collection of any juvenile justice fees still owed to the county, The San Mateo Daily Journal reports. Daniel Casillas, who was released from detention just before he turned 18 about four years ago, now serves on the county’s Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Commission.

Beyond Senate Bill 190

The passing of Senate Bill 190 brought with it a massive relief for thousands of California families moving forward, yet it did not do much for those who already paid their physical debt to society but still owe financially. Since the age of 13, Casillas (21) was arrested more than 20 times for non-serious offenses and a series of probation violations. The arrests and detentions that followed generated incarceration and legal representation fees, according to the article. Years after his release, Daniel’s family are still paying the county.

“Their number one reason for moving here was to provide their kids a better opportunity,” Casillas said. “I think they’ve kind of had to delay their hopes and work extra hard because of financial burden, because of my own adolescence.”

Supervisor Canepa introduced a juvenile court fee write-off for families like the Casillas. If the proposal is approved, it will afford relief to more than 6,000 families owing collectively around $12.6 million.

“When it comes to criminal justice, when you do the crime you have to pay the time,” said Canepa. “But when you pay the time, you shouldn’t be saddled as a juvenile with the debt for the rest of your life.”

Juvenile Defense Attorney

The Law Offices of Katie Walsh specialize in juvenile law. If your son or daughter is facing criminal charges or school expulsion, Attorney Walsh can advocate for you and your family in several ways. Please contact our office for a free consultation.

No matter which state you live in, most people would probably agree that sex crimes are some of the most heinous. Some may even argue that the damage caused by sexual assault, molestation and rape have lasting effects on victims that could be considered worse in many ways than that of murder. Everyone has different opinions, to be sure, yet it is hard to not see the value in keeping track of people who may be apt to commit sex offenses again.

In the United States, every state has some form of registry that convicted sex offenders are required by law to submit information about where they are residing. The public can access the registry to determine if there is anyone in their neighborhood that may be cause for concern. In California, there is a law in place enacted in 1996 that mandates the California Department of Justice (CA DOJ) to inform the public about specified registered sex offenders and about those individuals posing a risk to public safety.

California’s Megan’s Law came about in the wake of the rape and murder of seven-year-old Megan Kanka. The perpetrator was a known offender who moved across the street from Kanka’s family. Sex offender legislation, like the registry requirement and Megan’s Law, arguably have protected countless families from tragedy. However, there have been some concerns of late that some sex crimes are more severe than others, and that the lifelong registry requirement may be extreme in some cases.

A new bill has been introduced in California that would bring about a sex offender tier system, CBS 2 reports. Those below would potentially be able to be removed from the database. A spectrum with 1 being the least severe and 3 being the worst. If passed, offenders who fall into tier three would be in the registry for life, whereas people in tier 1 would be on the list for 10 years and tier 2 for twenty years. While the law seems pretty simple, if passed it would mean that the State would have to go back and review each offender’s case to determine which tier they should be on. As you can probably imagine there are a number of Californian’s who are not fans of SB 421.

“So if they’re on there for 10 years, after the first year of being on there they can petition to be taken off. They would go to the law enforcement and then they forward it to the district attorney’s office who writes it to be taken off. So someone who is a tier 1, which means possession of child porn or lewd acts with a child under the age of 14 or selling a minor for illegal acts, those are tier 1 offenses. That’s ridiculous,” said Mika Moulton, who is with the organization Christopher’s Clubhouse. SB 421 is still in the preliminary stages.

If you or loved one needs an attorney to understand the current laws and the proposed legislation and how it may impact you or a family member, remember to contact Attorney Katie Walsh. Ms. Walsh and her team will communicate with you and answer all your questions.

American reliance on smartphones for day-to-day tasks increases steadily every year, as the devices become ever increasingly more advanced. There was a time when people could easily point out what a cellphone can’t do, but with each passing year that becomes more and more difficult. While there are thousands of apps available across many platforms, the majority of phone activity involves texting and messaging. Many Americans prefer talking to people via text than they do conversing by voice. Most would argue that it is just easier even if the discussion is of an intimate nature, otherwise known as “sexting.”

It is probably not hard for you to imagine how sexting can go wrong. The sending of salacious words or images may seem harmless, but there is little way to control what will be done with such material. Most romantic relationships do not end in marriage, some relationships end with bad blood between the two partners. Some may feel inclined to use lewd material exchanged via text against their ex’s, posting stuff online. This is not a trend relegated to adults only, practically every teenager has a smartphone and many young people “sext” each other. An alarming reality that resulted in legislation being passed in California last year to address cyber sexual bullying.

Assembly Bill No. 2536, authored by Assembly Member Ed Chau (D-Monterey Park), clarifies that sexting, with the purpose or effect of humiliating or harassing a pupil, is a part of cyberbullying and incorporates sexting curriculum as a part of comprehensive sex education programs, according to a press release. Governor Jerry Brown signed the bill into law on September 21, 2016.

AB 2536 was designed to protect young boys and girls who may fall victim to the unintended consequences of sexting. Seeing the value of continuing the conversation, Lauren Hersh, director of anti-trafficking policy and advocacy at Sanctuary for Families, spoke about “Raising Empowered Girls” on February 28, 2017, at 6:30 p.m., at the Hillview Middle School Performing Arts Center, 1100 Elder Avenue in Menlo Park, CA. The event was free and open to the public, The Almanac reported.

“Alarmed by the lack of early education around issues such as sexting, ‘slut’ shaming, pornography, sexual harassment, and the like, Lauren has dedicated time and energy to informing parents about the dangers our young girls, and boys, face online and in relationship, as well as empowering youth to do something about it,” said Assistant Superintendent Erik Burmeister.

There have been campaigns to educate people about the dangers of sexting across the country and abroad. It is important for Californians to know that sexting with minors is a crime. Receiving sexting photos and disseminating them can be a crime as well.

Teenagers are notorious for making rash decisions, some of which can greatly impact the course of their life. Young people, just like adults, often find themselves caught up in the legal system for such decisions, but with an important exception. Minors are usually tried within the juvenile criminal system. The records of which that many believe will be sealed upon a minor reaching adulthood. The idea being that people should not have to answer for the bad decisions of their youth, for the rest of their life. Unfortunately, that is not the case and young people are required to petition to have their juvenile records sealed.

When people apply for a job, there is typically a section that asks applicants about their criminal history, that is their adult criminal history. While employers usually do not ask about one’s juvenile record, sometimes employers will inquire which could impact an individual’s chance at getting hired.

Effective January 1, 2017, employers in California face new restrictions when it comes to inquiring into and the use of juvenile criminal information, The National Law Review reports. California Labor Code § 432.7 has been amended under Assembly bill (A.B.) No. 1843, which hereby prohibits employers from inquiring, seeking, or using a California applicant/employee’s juvenile criminal history in the employment context. AB 1843 prohibits:

1. Asking an applicant to disclose, either in writing or verbally, information concerning or related to an arrest, detention, processing, diversion, supervision, adjudication, or court disposition that occurred while the individual was subject to the process and jurisdiction of juvenile courts/ law.
2. Seeking from any source whatsoever, or using, as a factor in determining any condition of employment (e.g., hiring, promotion, termination, decisions related to a training program, etc.), any record concerning or related to an arrest, detention, processing, diversion, supervision, adjudication, or court disposition that occurred while the individual was subject to the process and jurisdiction of juvenile courts/law.

“The only exceptions apply to certain health care facilities, as defined in Section 1250 of the Health and Safety Code,” according to attorney, Sarah R. Nichols. “Those employers may ask applicants to disclose an arrest under any section specified in Section 290 of the Penal Code (for those positions with regular access to patients) or an arrest under any section specified in Section 11590 of the Health and Safety Code (for those positions with access to drugs and medication) in certain circumstances.”

If you live in California and are interested in sealing your juvenile criminal record, please contact the Law Offices of Katie Walsh. While some juvenile crimes, such as murder, arson, robbery, assault with a deadly weapon, certain gun charges, carjacking are generally unable to be sealed, we can help you determine if you qualify and petition the court to have your record sealed. It is a decision that can help you later in life.

With November 8, 2016, seemingly long behind us, it is time for California defenders, prosecutors and judges to change their ways with regard to juveniles. California voters supported putting an end to what is known as “direct file,” a law that gave prosecutors the authority to dictate which juveniles would be tried in adult criminal court.

Concerns over direct file had been voiced for years, since the majority of teens being tried in adult court were minorities. Prosecutors in a number of California counties had been quick to direct file minorities, glaringly disproportionate to the instances of young Caucasians being direct filed. With the passing of Proposition 57, which gives judges the power to decide which minors are tried in adult court. The decision grants every juvenile the right to a hearing before a judge can make the decision to transfer a suspect to adult court, The Juvenile Justice Information Exchange (JJIE) reports. With regard to Prop. 57:

“It allows a more deliberative approach, a more thoughtful approach and that’s the way it should work. It shouldn’t be a quick decision, made sometimes in as little as 48 hours, often with scant information,” said Daniel Macallair, executive director of the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice.

Naturally, there is a lot of work that needs to be done by everyone working in the field of juvenile justice, in order to ensure that the law works the way that is was designed. What’s more, Prop. 57 will lead to a number of adolescents, who would have historically been subject to direct file, staying within the juvenile courts, meaning the juvenile system will need to be prepared to offer services to significantly more teens, according to the article. Additionally, nobody is sure yet how Prop. 57 will apply to the thousands of teens who have already been transferred to the adult courts and are potentially serving time behind bars in adult jails and prisons.

The new law gives California judges a new criterion for deciding which juveniles should be sent up to adult court, the article reports. Judges will now take into consideration a juvenile defendant’s “ongoing development and potential to change” before making a decision that could forever change the course of one’s life.

“The things that a court will look at are much more helpful to teenagers than the previous criteria were. They’re much more developmentally appropriate,” said Sue Burrell, policy and training director for the Pacific Juvenile Defender Center.

Katie Walsh is an attorney in Orange County, California. Attorney Walsh concentrates her law practice on juvenile defense, criminal defense, and victim’s rights.

Contact the Law Offices of Katie Walsh online or at (714) 351-0178.

Over the summer, we wrote about what is known as “direct file,” where states prosecutors have discretionary power about which court system to try a minor: juvenile or adult criminal court. California is one of 15 states that allows prosecutors to dictate the severity of an offense, deciding which court a juvenile case should be tried.

We pointed out that, direct file is used more commonly in certain California counties and that minorities are disproportionately affected by the process. The Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice found that black youth were 11.3 times more likely to be direct filed, compared to white minors. It should go without saying that being tried in the juvenile system is preferred over the adult-court, and the decision could seriously impact the future of a defendant.

California voters will decide on changing direct file, as part of Proposition 57, on November 8, 2016, KALW reports. Prop 57 seeks to reduce the prison population, save taxpayers millions and requires judges instead of prosecutors to decide whether minors should be prosecuted as adults, emphasizing rehabilitation for minors in the juvenile system.

“The race of the child and the county in which he or she commit this crime will determine whether or not he’ll be direct filed, not the severity of the crime,” says Frankie Guzman from the National Center of Youth Law “and that is not what we should be basing these decisions on.”

Teenagers who find themselves caught in the adult criminal system are at a severe disadvantage when it comes to rehabilitation. Prop 57 aims to give people a chance to turn their life around, rather than possibly condemn them to a life in the system.

“Not only are we denying the benefit of rehabilitation, we are ensuring all the negatives that the adult system carries,” Guzman says. “And so we often see young kids who really quickly have to grow and develop in a prison environment that is extremely violent.”

Instead of prosecutors deciding the fate of young people, minors would have a fitness hearing in juvenile court, the article reports. A judge will take a look at all the factors before deciding if a young defendant should be tried as an adult.

Katie Walsh is an attorney in Orange County, California. Attorney Walsh concentrates her law practice on juvenile defense, criminal defense, and victim’s rights.

Contact the Law Offices of Katie Walsh online or at (714) 351-0178.

In the United States, if you feel that your health and safety is in jeopardy by another person, you can petition the courts for a restraining order. People who have a restraining order against them, risk jail time if they contact or come within a certain distance of the complainant. While every state varies with regard to the grounds for obtaining a restraining order and the scope of such orders, by and large they are considered to be effective measures in protecting individuals.

Those who file a restraining order are commonly people who have experienced domestic abuse, i.e. spousal violence. Such victims need reassurances that they will be protected if their abuser makes threats. Recently, the question arose if whether protection orders could be warranted and/or violated by attacking one’s children. A California court of appeals believed that to be the case.

A woman in Alameda County, California, who had filed a restraining order against an abusive ex-boyfriend, asked the courts to extend the restraining order; this came about because her abuser harassed her over the phone and beat her children after the restraining order took effect. While the judge did not see things her way, the First District Court of Appeal in San Francisco felt otherwise, SFGATE reports. The court of appeals said that the woman’s testimony “established a reasonable apprehension of future abuse.”

The ruling had an impact across the state because the court said “abuse is not limited to the protected party seeking the order,” according to the article. The court of appeals ruling led to judges throughout the state being instructed that “abuse against the children is abuse against a parent,” said the executive director of the Family Violence Appellate Project, Erin Smith.

Katie Walsh is an attorney in Orange County, California. Attorney Walsh concentrates her law practice on juvenile defense, criminal defense, and victim’s rights.

Contact the Law Offices of Katie Walsh online or at (714) 351-0178.

In certain states, the process of “automatic transfer” or “direct file” is a common occurrence in the juvenile court system. Automatic transfer mandates that minors over a certain age be charged as an adult, if their crimes are considered to be severe, typically for violent offenses. On the other hand, in 15 states prosecutors have discretionary power about which court system to try a minor, juvenile or adult criminal court—a practice which is referred to “direct file.”

It turns out that while direct file is relatively common, some county prosecutors use it more often than others. In California, a new report shows that the filing of adult criminal charges against a minor is far more common in certain California counties and such cases disproportionately involve young people of ethnic descent, Public News Service reports. The research was conducted by three nonprofit organizations.

“What this highlights is that it’s not being used consistently by prosecutors,” said Maureen Washburn, one of the report’s co-authors and a policy analyst for the Center for Juvenile and Criminal Justice, “That it’s being used kind of at the discretion of a prosecutor and doesn’t align with rates of crime that are happening in that county.”

The findings indicate the practice occurs the least in San Francisco county because all minors are allowed a fitness hearing before a juvenile-system judge, according to the article. However, that is not a luxury afforded minors in every county, the California counties with the highest rates of direct file, include:

• Yuba
• Kings
• Sutter
• Napa
• San Joaquin

This November, California citizens will vote on the Public Safety and Rehabilitation Act of 2016. If the bill is passed, it will expand opportunities for good time credits and parole to adult prisoners, potentially shortening the length of inmate’s sentence. Packaged in the bill is a clause that would essentially end the process of direct file for minors throughout the state.

Katie Walsh is an attorney in Orange County, California. Attorney Walsh concentrates her law practice on juvenile defense, criminal defense, and victim’s rights. Contact the Law Offices of Katie Walsh online or at (714) 351-0178.

As part of a larger effort to reduce the incarcerated populations in overcrowded prisons, Governor Jerry Brown proposed a bill last November that would make it more difficult to charge juveniles as adults in criminal cases.

The initiative was initially blocked by a judge in Sacramento, but the California Supreme Court said they would hear arguments about the bill’s legality. The bill seeks to repeal part of an initiative from 2000 that permits prosecutors to charge juveniles as young as 14 as adults in cases involving serious offenses.

The bill would also require juvenile court judges to review each case individually and determine based on the specific facts and circumstances of each case whether the juvenile should be tried in juvenile court or adult court.

Perhaps the most important distinction between being tried as an adult and tried as a juvenile is the disparity in sentencing consequences. Juveniles tried as adults can be sentenced as adults, and as such can face much longer or severe sentences.Juveniles sentenced in juvenile court to incarceration must be released at age 23.

While legal and political battles over the bill continue, supporters are working to collect the necessary number of signatures from registered voters to put the bill on the ballot in the November general election.

California’s prisons are overcrowded and the state has taken measures to actively decrease its prison population. This particular bill is one of the more direct efforts to reduce the number of juveniles who are incarcerated in our state. Its future remains to be seen, both in court and potentially on the ballot.

Katie Walsh is an attorney in Orange County, California who focuses her practice on juvenile law, criminal defense, and victim’s rights.

Contact the Law Offices of Katie Walsh online or at (714) 351-0178.

Sexual harassment and victimization is not limited to any particular job, field, or profession. It is not always addressed, adjudicated and remedied in a court of law.

Recently, the prominent science journal Nature published a story about the testimony of a female scientific researcher who was harassed by a senior male colleague. Unfortunately, her story was not the first report of this kind: universities and research institutions have internally investigated and adjudicated reports of sexual or gender-based harassment for years now.

Just last week, for instance, an astrophysicist at Caltech was suspended for one year without pay for gender-based harassment. Last year, an astronomer at UC-Berkeley resigned in infamy after the university merely admonished him for committing harassing behavior against colleagues for years.

Advocates from within and without the academy have voiced support for victims of gender or sexual harassment, particularly in the sciences, a traditionally male-dominant profession.

Faculty, researchers, students, staff and other professionals on university campuses are entitled to protection from sexual or gender discrimination and harassment under Title IX of the federal Education Amendments of 1972.

Complaints filed under Title IX are internally investigated by university officials. If the allegations of the complaint are substantiated, then the university will ordinarily adjudicate the complaint through its own hearings process and decide what if any discipline should be imposed.

Speaking out about one’s experience as a victim—regardless of field or profession—can be daunting and intimidating. If you or someone you know is experiencing or concerned about their victimization, it may help to speak with an advocate.

Katie Walsh is an attorney in Southern California who focuses on victim’s rights and criminal law.

Contact the Law Offices of Katie Walsh at (714) 351-0178 to learn how Attorney Walsh may be able to guide, assist, or represent you.