Six Yates Motor arrestees get deferred prosecution

http://www.newsobserver.com/2012/01/30/1818054/six-yates-motor-arrestees-get.html

        hlynch@newsobserver.com -       Defendant Sonia Katchian, 63, left, of Chapel Hill, stands with her attorney Matthew Charles Suczynski in Orange District Court, Hillsborough Monday, Jan. 30, 2012 to hear Judge Charles Anderson find her guilty of delaying and obstructing a CHPD officer, a misdemeanor during a Nov. 13, 2011 confrontation in front of the Yates Motor Co. building on West Franklin Street in Chapel Hill.

hlynch@newsobserver.com - Defendant Sonia Katchian, 63, left, of Chapel Hill, stands with her attorney Matthew Charles Suczynski in Orange District Court, Hillsborough Monday, Jan. 30, 2012 to hear Judge Charles Anderson find her guilty of delaying and obstructing a CHPD officer, a misdemeanor during a Nov. 13, 2011 confrontation in front of the Yates Motor Co. building on West Franklin Street in Chapel Hill.

CORRESPONDENT
Tags: Chapel HillYates Motor arrest

Six people received deferred prosecution and another was scheduled for an afternoon trial today on charges filed in the Nov. 13 occupation of the Yates Motor Co. building on Franklin Street.

Sonia Katchian, 63, of Chapel Hill, was found guilty of delaying and obstructing a police officer, a misdemeanor, after she was arrested for approaching Chapel Hill Police Officer Scott Taylor and asking him several times why he was carrying an assault rifle.

Katchian said she did not think what she did was wrong, although she refused Taylor’s order to step back. She did not hear him ask her to move to the other side of the street, she said.

“I didn’t. I stepped back, watched him and felt it necessary to advise him there wasn’t a need for such strong weapons,” Katchian said. “He was following his orders, but, honestly, there comes a time when you have to call it like it is and say what you have to say.”

The seven other defendants were charged with misdemeanor breaking and entering.

Of them, Jack “Ryan” Jarrell, 24, of Carrboro, pleaded not guilty. His trial is scheduled for 2 p.m. today.

A seventh person charged with breaking and entering – Kassandra Ofray, 21, of Pittsboro – did not appear in court. Her attorney said neither he nor her mother has been able to contact her, and a missing persons report has been filed with the Orange County Sheriff’s Office.

The judge issued a warrant for Ofray’s arrest and set a $200 bond.

The brief building takeover has divided local residents. A town advisory group has requested an outside investigator to help compile a factual timeline of events leading to the Special Emergency Response Team raid. The Chapel Hill Town Council could vote on that tonight. The meeting starts at 7 p.m. in Town Hall.

Posted in General Ideas | Leave a comment

Jurors Need to Know That They Can Say No

Jurors Need to Know That They Can Say No

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/21/opinion/jurors-can-say-no.html?_r=2

IF you are ever on a jury in a marijuana case, I recommend that you vote “not guilty” — even if you think the defendant actually smoked pot, or sold it to another consenting adult. As a juror, you have this power under the Bill of Rights; if you exercise it, you become part of a proud tradition of American jurors who helped make our laws fairer.

The information I have just provided — about a constitutional doctrine called “jury nullification” — is absolutely true. But if federal prosecutors in New York get their way, telling the truth to potential jurors could result in a six-month prison sentence.

Earlier this year, prosecutors charged Julian P. Heicklen, a retired chemistry professor, with jury tampering because he stood outside the federal courthouse in Manhattan providing information about jury nullification to passers-by. Given that I have been recommending nullification for nonviolent drug cases since 1995 — in such forums as The Yale Law Journal, “60 Minutes” and YouTube — I guess I, too, have committed a crime.

The prosecutors who charged Mr. Heicklen said that “advocacy of jury nullification, directed as it is to jurors, would be both criminal and without constitutional protections no matter where it occurred.” The prosecutors in this case are wrong. The First Amendment exists to protect speech like this — honest information that the government prefers citizens not know.

Laws against jury tampering are intended to deter people from threatening or intimidating jurors. To contort these laws to justify punishing Mr. Heicklen, whose court-appointed counsel describe him as “a shabby old man distributing his silly leaflets from the sidewalk outside a courthouse,” is not only unconstitutional but unpatriotic. Jury nullification is not new; its proponents have included John Hancock and John Adams.

The doctrine is premised on the idea that ordinary citizens, not government officials, should have the final say as to whether a person should be punished. As Adams put it, it is each juror’s “duty” to vote based on his or her “own best understanding, judgment and conscience, though in direct opposition to the direction of the court.”

In 1895, the Supreme Court ruled that jurors had no right, during trials, to be told about nullification. The court did not say that jurors didn’t have the power, or that they couldn’t be told about it, but only that judges were not required to instruct them on it during a trial. Since then, it’s been up to scholars like me, and activists like Mr. Heicklen, to get the word out.

Nullification has been credited with helping to end alcohol prohibition and laws that criminalized gay sex. Last year, Montana prosecutors were forced to offer a defendant in a marijuana case a favorable plea bargain after so many potential jurors said they would nullify that the judge didn’t think he could find enough jurors to hear the case. (Prosecutors now say they will remember the actions of those jurors when they consider whether to charge other people with marijuana crimes.)

There have been unfortunate instances of nullification. Racist juries in the South, for example, refused to convict people who committed violent acts against civil-rights activists, and nullification has been used in cases involving the use of excessive force by the police. But nullification is like any other democratic power; some people may try to misuse it, but that does not mean it should be taken away from everyone else.

How one feels about jury nullification ultimately depends on how much confidence one has in the jury system. Based on my experience, I trust jurors a lot. I first became interested in nullification when I prosecuted low-level drug crimes in Washington in 1990. Jurors here, who were predominantly African-American, nullified regularly because they were concerned about racially selective enforcement of the law.

Across the country, crime has fallen, but incarceration rates remain at near record levels. Last year, the New York City police made 50,000 arrests just for marijuana possession. Because prosecutors have discretion over whether to charge a suspect, and for what offense, they have more power than judges over the outcome of a case. They tend to throw the book at defendants, to compel them to plead guilty in return for less harsh sentences. In some jurisdictions, like Washington, prosecutors have responded to jurors who are fed up with their draconian tactics by lobbying lawmakers to take away the right to a jury trial in drug cases. That is precisely the kind of power grab that the Constitution’s framers were so concerned about.

In October, the Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia, asked at a Senate hearing about the role of juries in checking governmental power, seemed open to the notion that jurors “can ignore the law” if the law “is producing a terrible result.” He added: “I’m a big fan of the jury.” I’m a big fan, too. I would respectfully suggest that if the prosecutors in New York bring fair cases, they won’t have to worry about jury nullification. Dropping the case against Mr. Heicklen would let citizens know that they are as committed to justice, and to free speech, as they are to locking people up.

Paul Butler, a former federal prosecutor, is a professor of law at George Washington University and the author of “Let’s Get Free: A Hip-Hop Theory of Justice.”

Posted in General Ideas | Leave a comment

Charges Dropped In Ambulance Theft

Posted: Friday, 19 August 2011 4:41PM

Charges Dropped In Ambulance Theft

Charges have been dropped against the Chapel Hill man who stole and wrecked an ambulance in April, but the story doesn’t end there.

On April 1, Orange County EMS workers arrived at the home of Patrick Akos in response to a call for emergency treatment. But while paramedics were treating him, Akos jumped up, ran from the house and stole an ambulance, hitting several cars and a fire truck before wrecking the vehicle at the end of his quiet suburban street.

Though Akos originally faced charges for felonious theft, hit and run and reckless driving, Orange County Assistant District Attorney Jeff Nieman says all charges were dropped once the details of the case came out.

“After reviewing the medical documentation, we realized we really couldn’t prove he had the requisite criminal intent to have committed larceny or even reckless driving. He did make many affirmative steps to pay restitution to the damaged parties in the neighborhood where he drove the vehicle, so in the interests of justice we decided to dismiss all the charges.

Nieman he had an early inkling that this wouldn’t be a run-of-the mill case after he got a call from the arresting officer.

“He said, “I looked in this man’s eyes right after all this stuff had happened, and I don’t think he had any idea what he had just done.’”

Attorney Mike Paduchowski represents Patrick Akos. He says Akos was diagnosed with epilepsy at age 40 and is still coming to terms with his condition.

Paduchowski says Akos not only suffered a complex partial seizure on that April morning, but also experienced a condition called postictal behavior.

“The Epilepsy Foundation says essentially your body goes into auto-pilot… The person is totally unaware of what happened and when consciousness finally returns, they have no memory of what occurred during the seizure.”

The postictal phase can last up to several hours after a seizure.

Because of the medical diagnosis, Akos is not legally responsible for the damages to property and vehicles. But Paduchowski says Akos felt he owed it to his neighbors to make amends.

“Patrick, being a member of the Chapel Hill community, actually did go door to door as soon as he was out of the hospital and recovered. He went to his neighbors, explained what had happened… and had people come out to their lawns to repair the landscaping.”

Akos has paid for the landscaping out of his own pocket.

Paduchowski says Akos has received an outpouring of support from both his neighbors and UNC, where he is employed as an associate professor at the School of Education.

“UNC-Chapel Hill has been extremely supportive of his medical condition. They’re working with him to give him the time that he needs to get his treatment corrected and they were very helpful with allowing him the time and support to get the damages taken care of. UNC-Chapel Hill really went above and beyond to support Patrick in all this.”

Meanwhile, the insurance companies are still wrangling over who will cover the costs for the wrecked ambulance and damaged vehicles.


Posted in General Ideas | Leave a comment

Chapel Hill man accused of stealing ambulance tells his story

Today, Patrick Akos, a client of the Law Office Matthew Charles Suczynski, PLLC and Michael Paduchowski sat down with NBC News 17 and told his story.

http://www2.nbc17.com/news/orange-county/2011/aug/24/3/chapel-hill-man-accused-stealing-ambulance-tells–ar-1328534/

By: CHARLOTTE HUFFMAN

Updated: August 24, 2011 - 9:28 PM

“I woke up and his arms were flailing. I go to call 911… when I came back he’s face down by the bed in a pool of blood, not breathing and so, I think he’s dead,” Sloane Akos recalled of the scary morning her husband, UNC Chapel Hill Professor Patrick Akos, had an epileptic attack.

Doctors later determined Patrick had a seizure the morning of April 11, 2011, despite having never experienced an epileptic episode before the incident.

When Orange County emergency responders arrived at the family’s Chapel Hill home, Patrick was walking around the house.

“His body was there but his mind was not. By this time, he is up and dragging himself around the house, bumping into things,” Sloane recalled.

During treatment, Patrick ran out of his home and took an Orange County Emergency ambulance. Patrickthen drove the ambulance around the neighborhood, hitting several parked vehicles and a Chapel Hill Fire truck before crashing at a dead end. Patrick was charged with felony larceny of a vehicle, reckless driving and six counts of hit and run.

Patrick says he does not remember any part of the incident.

“I went to sleep… and the next thing I knew I was in handcuffs on a sidewalk. So it is really hard to understand,” Patrick told NBC-17 in an exclusive interview.

Doctors later determined Akos experienced an unusual onset of epilepsy — a neurological condition — at the age of 40. In addition to epilepsy, doctors determined Patrick suffered a Complex Partial Seizure followed by a condition referred to as Postictal Behavior.

The National Epilepsy Foundation describes the Postictal Period as a condition where the body goes on “auto pilot,” completely unaware of what is happening. The foundation says the person may have no recollection of what transpired after the spell.

According to the Epilepsy Foundation North Carolina, epilepsy affects an estimated 2.3 million people in theUnited States and can develop in any person at any age.

“In all the reading I’ve done, I’ve learned that [epilepsy] is most common in children and the elderly… Developing epilepsy when you are 40 years old like me is definitely rare,” Patrick explained.

The Epilepsy Foundation North Carolina reports that one in 10 people will have a seizure at some point in their life, and that one of the biggest problems for people with epilepsy is the public’s lack of understanding about the disorder.

“The most challenging thing was the felony charges … not having any awareness of what happened, then my mug shot is all over the Internet saying, ‘Stolen Ambulance.’ That was the most challenging thing for me,”Patrick recalled.

For four months, Patrick had felony charges pending against him until earlier this week when the Orange County District Attorney’s office dropped all charges against him.

Patrick’s attorneyMichael Paduchowski, says he presented a significant amount of medical documentation over several meetings with the Orange County District Attorney’s office in order to educate them on Patrick’s medical condition.

The county dismissed the charges based on a medical document which showed Patrick was not able to meet the requirements for criminal intent according to state law.

Paduchowski sent the following letter to NBC-17:

“Although Patrick was not legally liable for the damage he caused to the property and the vehicles, he has worked hard to ensure that all the damages have been taken care of. As soon as Patrick was released from the hospital he went door to door to speak with his neighbors and explain the situation. He is a proud member of the Chapel Hill community who did not want to see his neighbors injured in any way. He has paid for the damaged properties out of his own pocket.”

“We wanted to take responsibility for what happened and that’s what we did,” Patrick said. “The community, the University and everyone in the neighborhood has been really supportive and understanding of what happened.”

Patrick is an associate professor in the School of Education. He began working for the University in July 2001 and remains employed with the University.

Currently, Patrick is not allowed to drive a car. He is required to go six months without any epileptic incidents.

Posted in General Ideas | Leave a comment

Pro Bono Awards Presented at NCBA Annual Meeting

http://www.ncbar.org/about/communications/news/2011-news-articles/pro-bono-awards-presented-at-annual-meeting.aspx

Pro Bono Awards Presented At Annual Meeting

Article Date: Friday, June 24, 2011

Written By: Russell Rawlings

Thorp Pitts
Robert Hahn, left, accepts Thorp Award from Gene Pridgen. Lewis Pitts, left, accepts Greenblatt Award from
Gene Pridgen.
Large Firm
George Hettrick, left, and Robert Hahn accept
on behalf of Hunton & Williams.

The North Carolina Bar Association, in conjunction with the NCBA Foundation’s Public Service Advisory Committee, presented the 2011 Pro Bono Service Awards on Friday, June 24, at the NCBA Annual Meeting in Asheville.

Robert Hahn of Charlotte received the William L. Thorp Award, presented annually since 1984 by the NCBA. The award recognizes the Pro Bono Attorney of the Year and was named in memory of Bill Thorp, a founder of Legal Services of North Carolina, in 2002.

The 2011 recipient of the Deborah Greenblatt Outstanding Legal Services Attorney Award was Lewis Pitts of Legal Aid of North Carolina’s Greensboro office. Since 2006, this award has been presented in memory of the longtime executive director of Carolina Legal Assistance.

The Larger Law Firm Pro Bono Award recipient was Hunton & Williams, LLP, while Broker & Hamrick, P.A., received the Smaller Law Firm Pro Bono Award.

The Johnston County Bar Association received the Chief Justice Award and the Driver’s License Restoration Project of the North Carolina Central University and University of North Carolina Schools of Law received the Law Student Group Pro Bono Award.

Small Firm
Anna Hamrick, left, and Leah Broker accept
Small Firm Award from Gene Pridgen.

The Younger Lawyer Pro Bono Service Award, presented annually by the Young Lawyers Division, was presented to R. Michael Wells Jr. of Winston-Salem at the annual meeting of the YLD on Saturday, June 25.

Read further for additional information on each award and honoree.

William L. Thorp Pro Bono Service Award
Robert Hahn was nominated by Legal Services of Southern Piedmont for “contributing an extraordinary amount of pro bono service to obtain Medicaid, Social Security Disability and other benefits that had been denied for indigent clients.” In 2010, the nomination continues, Hahn provided nearly 300 hours of pro bono service and closed 12 cases. One case required over 60 pro bono service. In another case, he obtained SSI benefits for a three-year-old girl with autism spectrum disorder and impaired sensory awareness.

Johnston
Tom Berkau, left, and Cindy Pittard accept Chief
Justice Award from Gene Pridgen.

Hahn practices with Hunton & Williams.

Deborah Greenblatt Outstanding Legal Services Attorney Award
Lewis Pitts practices in the Greensboro office of Legal Aid of North Carolina and serves as the senior managing attorney of Advocates for Children’s Services, a statewide project of LANC. He was nominated by fellow Legal Aid attorney Keith Howard of Durham.

Pitts has served as a public interest attorney for 38 years and founded ACS in 2000. He represents children in matters involving school discipline, the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Improvement Act, children’s Medicaid entitlements, abuse, neglect and dependency. Among his many other public service activities, Pitts is past chair of the NCBA’s Juvenile Justice and Children’s Rights Section.

Larger Law Firm Pro Bono Service Award
The efforts of Robert Hahn and his Hunton & Williams colleagues are also denoted in their nomination for the Larger Law Firm Pro Bono Service Award submitted by Legal Services of Southern Piedmont and supported by Legal Aid of North Carolina-Charlotte.

“Pro bono work is an established part of the culture at Hunton & Williams,” the nomination states, “and the firm has a long history of providing outstanding service and support to both agencies in multiple practice areas. In 2010, Hunton & Williams contributed nearly 450 hours of pro bono service to LSSP and LANC; the number of hours excludes the administrative and mentoring time firm coordinators give to support their projects.”

The nomination also recognized the noteworthy efforts of pro bono coordinator Megan Miller, Wendy Spanbauer and James D. Humphries IV.

Smaller Law Firm Pro Bono Service Award
Broker and Hamrick of Asheville was nominated for the Smaller Law Firm Pro Bono Service Award by Pisgah Legal Services for outstanding pro bono service rendered through the Mountain Area Volunteer Lawyer Program. Partners Leah Broker and Anna Hamrick assist clients seeking Social Security disability, Supplemental Security Income, Medicaid and Workers’ Compensation benefits. Combined they have contributed 33 years of service to MAVL and 470 pro bono hours.

“Amazingly enough,” the nomination states, “the quantifiable benefit of the firm’s pro bono work only between January 2007 and February 2010 has been an incredible $7,369,700!”

Chief Justice Award
The Johnston County Bar Association was nominated for the Chief Justice Award by Legal Aid of North Carolina’s Smithfield office. Over 10 percent of the bar association’s 128 members participate regularly in the Volunteer Lawyers Program administered by the Smithfield office of LANC. In 2010, the Johnston County Bar Association provided more than 140 hours of pro bono service to the poor and indigent in Johnston County through the VLP, and contributed countless other pro bono hours assisting other agencies that assist the underrepresented. JCBA members participate annually in the NCBA’s 4ALL Statewide Service Day and host their own Ask-A-Lawyer Day in Johnston County.

Law Student Group Pro Bono Award
The Driver’s License Restoration Project of the North Carolina Central University School of Law and the University of North Carolina School of Law was nominated for the Law Student Group Pro Bono Award by Page Potter of the NCCU School of Law. The unique project involves students from both law schools and pro bono attorneys. Its goal is to assist indigent North Carolinians in reinstating their driver’s licenses following revocation. Students involved in the project attend training sessions, publicize their services through courthouse fliers and social media, and work with volunteer attorneys to help clients restore their driving privileges.

2011 Younger Lawyer Pro Bono Service Award
R. Michael Wells Jr. has been selected in part because of his efforts with Project Grace, a YLD initiative that provides health care power of attorneys and living wills free of charge to underprivileged North Carolinians with an emphasis on fixed income senior citizens. Wells has also undertaken a number of leadership roles within the bar and with community organizations in the Winston-Salem area, including United Way and the Parks and Recreation Department where he serves as a commissioner. He has also been actively involved in the American Bar Association where he serves as the ABA YLD District 9 representative for 2010-12.

Law Schools
The NCCU and UNC Schools of Law captured the Law Student Group Pro Bono Award.

Posted in General Ideas | Leave a comment

2011 North Carolina Bar Association Pro Bono Awards

The North Carolina Driver’s License Restoration Project received the Law Student Group Pro Bono Project award for 2011.  Matthew along with Jeffrey Nieman, an Assistant District Attorney for District 15-B, co-founded the project in 2009.

http://www.ncbar.org/about/communications/news/2011-news-articles/2011-pro-bono-award-winners-announced.aspx

Law Student Group Pro Bono Award

The Driver’s License Restoration Project of the North Carolina Central University School of Law and the University of North Carolina School of Law was nominated for the Law Student Group Pro Bono Award by Page Potter of the NCCU School of Law.

The unique project involves students from both law schools and pro bono attorneys. Its goal is to assist indigent North Carolinians in reinstating their driver’s licenses following revocation. Students involved in the project attend training sessions, publicize their services through courthouse fliers and social media, and work with volunteer attorneys to help clients restore their driving privileges.

Posted in General Ideas | Leave a comment

Police actions violated the Constitution, judge rules

Police actions violated the Constitution, judge rules

The Daily Tar Heel, January 26, 2010

Underage drinking busts draw legal challenges

January 26, 2010
Senior Writer

The police cracked down on underage drinking this fall, but the extra effort also led to several unconstitutional arrests, defense attorneys and legal counselors say.

And now, after a number of successful challenges to charges in court, drinking ticket numbers have fallen back to normal levels.

“It takes a judge to say, ‘Hey, you pushed the limit here,’” said Chapel Hill attorney Matthew Suczynski, who represented four students in a case that was dismissed last week. He argued successfully that officers violated his clients’ Fourth Amendment rights, which protect them from unlawful searches and seizures.  “The pendulum has swung back.”

September numbers for underage alcohol consumption and possession tickets were about four times higher than those from 2008.

By December, however, ticket numbers had fallen to about half of the same month’s from last year.

Suczynski said he has taken on dozens of cases this fall, more than he has ever seen in three years in Chapel Hill.

Part of the pressure to ramp up alcohol law enforcement last fall came from community groups like the Coalition for Alcohol and Drug Free Teenagers of Chapel Hill and Carrboro, which has secured two grants worth about $100,000 each to combat underage drinking.

Some of that money went to Chapel Hill’s new alcohol law enforcement task force, ALERT, as part of what District Attorney Jim Woodall called “a new emphasis” on underage drinking.

“I do think that the attention given to the issue is something that is on law enforcement’s radar screen,” said coalition member and retired superior court judge Ryan Bogle.

“They devote their resources to areas where there are concerns within a community.”

Busting big parties often leads officers to “jump to the next step” before finding probable cause that underage drinking is going on, Woodall said.

“Whenever there are four officers, and let’s say there’s 50 people at a party, each officer essentially has a dozen people to account for,” he said. “That’s what makes it real tough. They have to make real quick decisions when they’re dealing with overwhelming numbers.”

Woodall added that people have always challenged alcohol cases, and the recent decisions are not affecting policy in the district attorney’s office.

One case dismissed last week focused on an ALERT police team that entered the Warehouse apartments on Rosemary Street without a warrant in September.

Originally responding to noise complaints, the ALERT squad did not allow students to leave the scene that night, asking them to “prove” their innocence by submitting to a Breathalyzer test, according to a defense motion and police video of the event.

Defense documents state that one officer jammed his foot in an apartment door to prevent a student from closing it and told her, “You are not going back into your apartment unless I go with you.”

“The enforcement method that apparently has been adopted is one that we haven’t seen in other areas of the criminal law,” said Chapel Hill attorney Steve Bernholz, who represented two students charged in the Warehouse incident.

“It’s a Fourth Amendment issue. When you round up students who have been raised to be truthful and cooperate with police, you have essentially corralled them often without any reasonable suspicion.”

Suczynski’s case was dismissed on the grounds that police had detained the entire party, about 50 students, without reasonable suspicion and probable cause for everyone in attendance.

On the night of the party, police responding to a noise complaint on McDade Street arrived at the scene and asked everyone in the house to come outside, according to defense documents.

Anyone who tried to flee was pursued, caught and brought back. Police then asked, by show of hands, who was 21 and had been drinking.

“It felt very forced,” said one student who was charged at the party, but accepted a guilty plea bargain instead of fighting the misdemeanor charge in court. She was granted anonymity for this story because she plans to get the charges expunged.

“There’s only one way in and one out, and there were five police cars.”

Though more students are challenging their tickets than in the past, police say they have not fine-tuned their policy in response to this fall’s cases.

Matthew Sullivan, a Chapel Hill police crisis counselor and legal adviser, said he was not aware of any departmental meetings to address alcohol citation policy.

“It’s our obligation to respond to the courts,” Sullivan said, though he declined to discuss policy on a general or case-by-case basis.

While the number of citations skyrocketed this fall, the consequences of the charges also became more weighty.

Taking a plea bargain, or deferred prosecution, in exchange for the charges later being expunged often doesn’t wipe the slate clean, said Dorothy Bernholz, an attorney at UNC’s Student Legal Services and Steve Bernholz’s wife.

An increasing number of employers and schools are asking applicants to list any charges expunged from their record, though state statues do not legally require applicants to answer that question, she said.

“It’s not uncommon for the police when they’re in the process of charging the student to say, ‘Don’t worry about this. It’s minor, and I’m sure it’ll be dismissed if you talk to the DA,” Steve Bernholz said.

“But expungement doesn’t really solve the problem these days.”

The decision to hire a lawyer, however, can be an expensive one.

The student charged at the McDade party said she took a bargain because her parents didn’t want to pay for an attorney without a guarantee the case would be dismissed.

“It’s purely punitive,” Dorothy Bernholz said. “It’s not an educational process.”

KNOW YOUR RIGHTS

If stopped by police, you can

1. Remain silent You are not required to answer questions.

2. Do not consent to a search State clearly for the officer and witnesses to hear, “I do not consent to a search.”

3. Do not physically resist a search Repeat “I do not consent to a search.” If the search is not lawful, it can be suppressed.

4. Do not resist an arrest Remain silent and remain calm.

5. If arrested State clearly “I am going to remain silent.”

Contact the City Editor at citydesk@unc.edu.

Posted in General Ideas | Leave a comment

Happy Holidays!

Just wanted to take a second to wish everyone who visits this site a happy and safe holiday season.

Matt

Posted in General Ideas | Leave a comment

Why not to talk to the police

Below is a link to a lecture about why not to talk to the police, even if you haven’t done anything wrong. This does a good job of showing that no matter the situation it is in your best interest not to answer any questions.

Matt

http://www.wimp.com/coprule/

Posted in General Ideas | Leave a comment

Article on Recent Trial

Here is a an article from the Herald Sun on a case I recently tried in Orange County Superior Court.

Man guilty of false report
BY BETH VELLIQUETTE : The Herald-Sun
bvelliquette@heraldsun.com
Jun 3, 2009

HILLSBOROUGH — In a case that put the UNC campus in a panic just weeks after the murder of Eve Carson, a jury found a man who falsely claimed he was robbed and assaulted by a black man on the UNC campus guilty of filing a false police report Tuesday.

Brian Wallace Sharpe told police on March 28, 2008, that a black man jumped out of the bushes near Wilson Library during the early morning hours and pistol-whipped him, causing a large gash in his head.

His report caused a campus-wide alert that a dangerous man might be on the loose on the UNC campus.

Superior Court Judge Ken Titus sentenced Sharpe to 45 days in jail but suspended the sentence for 12 months. He also ordered Sharpe to pay court costs and a $250 fine.

Titus ordered Sharpe to perform 100 hours of community service for the benefit of the university police department.

“If they need their toilets cleaned, he’s going to do it,” Titus said.

Sharpe was already convicted of filing a false police report in District Court, but he appealed the conviction, so the case was heard again, this time in front of a jury in Superior Court.

Three UNC police officers told jurors how they were called to investigate a report of an armed robbery and assault near the library. The victim, Sharpe, said he was walking to Wilson Library to turn in his time card before 4 a.m., when a young black male jumped out of the bushes and offered to sell him marijuana.

Sharpe told the investigators that he declined, and that the man then asked for his wallet. Sharpe pulled the wallet out to show he didn’t have any money, and that’s when the man hit him in the head with a handgun. Sharpe told the officers he chased the man but lost him.

Because of Carson’s murder, the campus already was in a state of panic, and Sharpe’s story only added to the feeling of terror, said Assistant District Attorney Steve Motta.

As they began to investigate Sharpe’s story, the investigators didn’t find any blood at the crime scene or on the route where Sharpe claimed he chased his assailant.

As the day wore on, they began to doubt Sharpe’s story, so they confronted him about the lack of blood evidence. Sharpe changed his story and said the assault happened in the parking lot, not on the sidewalk, but there was no blood there either.

Sharpe then changed his story once again and said he was assaulted on Franklin Street, but he didn’t want his girlfriend to know he went to a club that night instead of to his job at the library.

As the investigators prepared to call the Chapel Hill Police Department to report that an assault occurred in its jurisdiction, Sharpe changed his story yet again and told the investigators that he had assaulted himself at home after he saw a video of his girlfriend having sex with another man.

“In a bit of frustration, he took the handgun and smashed it against his head,” said Capt. Matthew Ferguson of the UNC Police Department.

Sharpe told Ferguson that he needed medical attention and made up the story because he wanted free medical care at the emergency room.

Sharpe’s attorney, Matthew Suczynski, did not offer any evidence for the defense but argued that Sharpe’s actions did not meet the elements of the crime of filing a false police report because Sharpe didn’t mean to interfere or obstruct a police officer. Rather, his motive was to get free health care, Suczynski said.

Assistant District Attorney Steve Motta argued that Sharpe filed the report to get something for free, taxpayer money intended for real victims of crimes.

“He acted with malicious intent to try to convince these police officers to investigate this story all in an effort to get something he was not entitled to,” Motta said. “He lied every step of the way. He did it to get money.”

Posted in General Ideas | Leave a comment
  • Practice Areas

    • Civil Litigation
      • State Licensing Boards
      • Breach of Contract
      • Professional Malpractice
    • Criminal Defense
      • Alcohol Offenses
      • Assaults
      • Drug Offenses
      • Expungement
      • Fraud, Forgery, False Pretenses
      • Larceny, Possession of Stolen Goods, Embezzlement
      • Weapons Offenses
      • Honor Court
    • DWI Defense
      • Stop Issues
      • Standardized Field Sobriety Tests
      • Arrest Issues
      • Intoxilyzer 5000/EC-IR II Issues
      • Post Arrest Issues
      • Punishments
      • Limited Driving Priviledges
    • Traffic Defense
      • DMV and Insurance Points
      • Accidents and Tickets
      • Speeding
      • Driving While License Revoked
    • Personal Injury
      • Contributory Negligence
      • Punitive Damages