My friend is dating a guy and he's 17 at the moment and she's 15 is it illegal for them to date even If they were dating before he turns 18?
California is a sexually regressive state, all sex below 18 is illegal. Per available data, about 1/2 of male and female minors (under 18), are (mostly un-prosecuted) criminals: http://www.kinseyinstitute.org/resources/FAQ.html
The data is for Americans, not Californians, but it's doubtful that California teens are more prude than other state youths. Yet another reason to avoid cops like the plague, don't discuss romantic practices with anyone including friends, family, teachers, or cops. Don't engage in sexting, sexually explicit talk in written form, or take revealing photos. Best bet is to move or avoid "dating". All the best.
arrested when he returned home after work on al edged domestic violence charges
Best bet is talk to your family member's attorney. Assuming your family member wants his attorney to talk to you about the case, the attorney can tell you the charges. You also call or go in person to the criminal clerk who can provide you basic information like what he's charged with and the next court date. All the bestSee question
when i was caught i was very cooperative they never contacted police let me go sighned something cant go back recieved 2nd demand letter do you think criminal charges are going to occur
Ignore the civil demand letters, don't pay. Since police were not summoned, you dodged a bullet in the form of a criminal prosecution. All the bestSee question
Recently, a family law court found that the second marriage is bigamous and granted an annulment. The bigamist spouse is obviously no longer married to two spouses right now because the second marriage was recently annulled. But there was a poin...
It is beyond unlikely that an Alameda County DA would charge a criminal bigamy case. Bigamy, as a crime, is a throwback to a long gone era before no-fault divorce, pre-marital sex, and same sex marriage. Bigamy does appear to be a wobbler so the statute of limitations is 3 years, meaning that if the 2nd marriage occurred more than 3 years ago, the time for a prosecution (however unlikely) is now impossible. All the bestSee question
I have completed 1 of 2 years of probation and am looking for a new job.
If you're on probation, this indicates you were convicted of a misdemeanor which means that the conviction will show up on your background check. If the matter was an infraction, it will show up on a background check but employers do not ordinarily take negative action on infractions (but they are not legally prevented from doing so). Your best bet is to pursue a 1203.4 motion to dismiss which will prevent the employer from taking any negative action against you for the conviction. If you're still on probation, another motion can be done at the same time to terminate probation early. All the best.See question
Traffic cop pulled me over for lane change without an indicator, but mentioned Indian driver lic in valid and gave me a ticket as misdemeanor "NOT LICENCED", and lane change as Infraction. Now I am in India, and some $700+ has been put as fine. ...
You should hire an attorney to deal with this matter. Legally if you fail to appear by the scheduled date, a warrant may issue (even on an infraction charge although typically in most counties, the court simply imposes a civil assessment (fine increase) for failing to attend court on a traffic case). If the court issues a warrant (because you're charged with a misdemeanor or because the court issues a warrant for failing to appear on an infraction), this may cause problems in re-entering the country and may potentially have immigration consequences. Best bet is to hire an attorney, there's no need to come back to the states to get an attorney to dismiss this case. All the best.See question
Assuming it is a "typical" speeding violation (ie speed was under 100 mph, no alcohol involved, etc.)?
For some reason the criminally accused want criminal attorneys to hazard % estimates as to the likely outcomes of certain events occurring; i.e., "what's the % chance likelihood of getting acquitted/convicted/case dismissed/ect". Since I'm asked this kind of question so often, I now rely on one of three pat answers (or a combination thereof): 1. impossible to predict, 2. more likely than not, 3. or less likely than not. I'd say the answer is generally 1 but 2 is likely accurate (but I've seen no reliable published data to justify 2, simply anecdotal and from talking to other lawyers). Regardless, in criminal practice and surely in any law practice, the prudent strategy is to assume (and prepare) for the worst and hope for the best. Prepare for the cop being present, and pray he/she doesn't show. Best of luck.See question
I was caught stealing 382$ worth of merchandise from Kohls. It is my first offense and I have never been in trouble with the law before.
Jail is unlikely but if you are convicted of petty theft, there could be other serious ramifications to your job and potentially immigration status. You should hire an attorney who can work to keep your record clean. All the bestSee question
Two people are driving on a freeway going well above the speed limit. A police airplane overhead catches them speeding and dispatches a squad car to pull the car over and issue a speeding citation. Knowing that the police plane saw them, the two...
In California, the government must prove each and every element of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt in order to convict, even in infraction vehicle cases. The first element to prove speeding is that the individual charged must have been driving, being a passenger in a speeding car is not a crime. On the facts presented, there is no way to prove this element of the crime at trial, regardless if the officer cites one or both of the persons. Neither individuals is required to say anything to the police and neither is required to testify at trial. However, this fact pattern is not as interesting as you might think because your hypothetical excludes the common element of officer 'testilying'. If the officer got to the scene and neither party would admit driving, he would have two choices: 1. cite neither party knowing that he'd never be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt who was driving at trial without an admission or 2. decide one of the parties was the driver (likely the person in whose name the car is registered) and testify at trial that one or both parties admitted the registered car owner was driving. Once officer chooses 2 at trial, remaining silent (or testifying) will almost certainly result in a guilty verdict for the charged person given how much credibility courts place in sworn officer testimony. Before officer cites one of the party's (with the idea that he will "testilie" if needed) he will likely tell the two individuals choosing to remain silent at the scene something like, "if you guys don't tell me who was driving, I'm gonna cite the registered owner and you guys can sort it out later"). In dealing with cops, one can never assume that they will tell the truth. But to answer the question, if the officer and judge honestly operate in good faith no ticket would be issued and if issued, the case should not result in a conviction at trial.See question
I am doing masters of sciences in Fremont, CA. involved in petty theft at Target store worth of around $50. police office suggested me to attend court in next 2 weeks. my questions are 1. do I need to hire lawyer or I can explain my situ...
You should certainly hire an attorney to fight this case. You should definitely not attempt to "explain your situation" (presumably to a judge). If you are convicted, there is no way to erase this from record, although there is a post-conviction dismissal procedure pursuant to pc 1203.4 (but this has no effect on immigration). All the best.See question