19-year sentence for fatal rock beating (Sam Spital)

COMMENTARY BY SAM SPITAL, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY:

“On November 15, 2012, the UT San Diego news reported the defendant with a long history of drug related offenses in a revenge and repeated beating with a rock to the head of a 31 year old homeless man was sentenced to 19 Years to Life in State Prison for Second Degree Murder, and Threatening a Witness and Assault with a Deadly Weapon on another person. The defendant was represented by a Deputy Public Defender who alleged: ‘his life appears to have been eroded by drug use.’ When asked by the Judge what facts were in dispute, the article noted the defendant’s appointed counsel did not provide any specifics. This is a tragic example of the scourge of addiction and how even during and after incarceration, adequate treatment is misdirected or absent”

–SAM SPITAL, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY

Dad uses bus bench ads to find son’s killer (Sam Spital)

COMMENTARY BY SAM SPITAL, CRIMINAL LAWYER: 

“On November 12, 2012, the UT San Diego described a father who moved his family to a different county in an effort to help his teenage son who had drifted into gang associations. It meant the father’s daily commute to work as a security officer would be as much as two hours each way for his son to have a chance outside of the gang he was a member. Just when it looked like the young boy had turned the corner, however, he was stabbed to death in a gang fight between two rival gangs only a day after he gave an anti-gang presentation at a local college. This is a tragic loss for a family that tried to use every measure available to protect their son. And, the police have not been able to solve the homicide since they have received no cooperation from potential witnesses. Hopefully, the father’s efforts to use advertisements on bus benches will eventually assist in identifying the offender(s) and help the family obtain closure.”

SAM SPITAL, CRIMINAL LAWYER

 

Police, bomb squad respond to arsenal in car trunk

commentary by SAM SPITAL, criminal defense lawyer:

“Officers of the San Diego State University arrested an underage individual who purchased alcohol at a CVS store using a fake ID, as reported in the UT online October 29, 2012 edition of the local newspaper. The police officers found a hugearsenal of weapons in his car trunk, including six shotguns and two rifles; in addition, there was a can of gasoline. It strains credulity to believe anyone would under any circumstances be in possession of such items in the quantity described in the article. Little more was reported, making it a challenge to provide an analysis or opine on a defense strategy.”

SAM SPITAL, Criminal Defense Lawyer

Pit bull owner arraigned following attack on girl (Sam Spital)

“The owner of a 65 pound terrier pit bull was charged with a felony for having a dangerous animal that can cause great bodily injury when it attacked and mauled a 4 year old girl when she tried to pet it in the apartment courtyard where she resided.

The District Attorney stated the pet’s owner immediately afterwards ‘grabbed her dog, went to her apartment gathered her belongings and went to her car. When the cops got there she was trying to drive away. They stopped her from doing so, but when they did, she admitted that she was headed to Tijuana.’Owners of animals often focus on how much they love their pet or pit bull dog, even having cared for since birth and for all intents and purposes claim the pet is calm and gentle. Nonetheless, it is critical everyone always be mindful of the dangers involved when they have a pit bull or similar type pet that might escape a fenced yard, get loose from its leash &/or be near anyone else. This seems particularly evident in California where there is both civil and criminal liability. Of course, the impact on the victim and his/her family can be life long, and certainly the pet owner wants to avoid this and their own sorrow and anguish.”

SAM SPITAL, Criminal Lawyer

Recycling fraud drains California’s cash (SAM SPITAL)

“Yesterday’s article in the Los Angeles Times, October 8, 2012, described the conundrum facing California in the recycling of cans and bottles in which the State is paying out more money for these recycled items than it is collecting in revenue from the deposits paid by individuals purchasing drinks.

It is claimed that fraud rings are bringing into California in semi-trailer trucks between $40 million and $200 million per year in recycled containers from adjacent states that do not offer the redemption program.Because only purchases made in California are eligible for the program, the California Department of Justice has brought over 10 criminal cases against these fraud rings in the previous 12 months.

I believe we should determine the real value of the scrap metal, aluminum and glass. Since the centers that accept these items are profit making businesses, their reimbursement of five to ten cents per container to the consumer (or others) is far less than the money they make from salvaging the material.

Perhaps the State needs to re-negotiate its contracts with these centers to offset the loss of revenue.

This is just another example of how inefficient our government is in the operation of its business affairs. Certainly filing criminal charges against people who are collecting containers so that they can be salvaged seems a waste of energy and law enforcement resources when the entire concept of recycling has a valid social purpose.”

SAM SPITAL, CRIMINAL LAWYER

 

Prosecutors re-file robbery charges against off-duty firefighters involved in fight

“KFMB TV digital edition reported on October 4, 2012 the District Attorney re-filed criminal charges against three off-duty San Diego Firemen accusing them of robbery. This criminal charge stems from an altercation in which the initial Complaint was assault and battery and making threats. The trial court judge ordered the defendants to stand trial for grand theft after the Preliminary Hearing, dismissing the other charges as he noted they acted in self-defense. Explaining the basis for grand theft, the Judge stated the defendants continued to pursue the alleged victims after the bar fight ended, and were found to have in their possession the wallet and several contents thereof that belonged to one of the alleged victims.

The article has many references to individuals that each gave their account of the specifics, but one would have to read the police report as well as the transcript of the Preliminary Hearing to properly render an opinion as to the facts and conclusions. Therefore, I do not want to speculate on the defense I might assert if I was retained as counsel. Suffice to say, if any or all of the firefighters are found guilty of robbery, they each not only face the loss of their employment but a “strike” and up to three years in State Prison.”

SAMUEL SPITAL, LAWYER

3rd California police officer charged in beating death of homeless man (Sam Spital)

“CNN News today, September 28, 2012, reported a horrific crime in which a former Fullerton (Orange County community in Southern California) Police Officer was charged with Involuntary Manslaughter and Excessive Force in the savage beating death of a mentally ill homeless man, Kelly Thomas, in which it  was also noted he was wearing slippers and long pants, shirtless and carrying a backpack at the time police received a call of a “homeless man looking in car windows and pulling door handles of parked cars at the city’s bus depot.” Two other Fullerton Police officers were also similarly charged in this brutal crime being charged. It is noteworthy that a video of the incident depicted the homeless man crying out “help me” and “I can’t breathe” as he was violently beaten. The defense claim improper medical care after the hospital admission may have contributed to the death. One of the defendant’s attorneys claimed his client was standing upright during the time two of the other officers were bent over trying to arrest Thomas.

The City of Fullerton reportedly paid the mother of Thomas $1 million as part of a settlement. The father who was divorced has a separate wrongful death claim pending. No amount of money can replace one’s child whether an adult or not, nor compensate the premature loss of a loved one.

Regardless of what appears to be a senseless homicide, we should not second guess the officers and their conduct without knowing all of the facts. Moreover, the stress and pressures they face on a daily basis need to be mitigated by much more and continuous education and training to be more tolerant of deviant behavior, particularly when it is possible the alleged offender has a mental illness.”

Sam Spital, Criminal Defense Lawyer

Man arrested after 16 arson fires set in San Diego (Sam Spital)

“The UT San Diego (more commonly known as the “Union Tribune”) Newspaper on September 12, 2012 in its online and digital edition reported an arrest of a man for arson for what could be the source of a series of many recent fires in San Diego in dumpsters, a coffee cart and at least one automobile in Downtown, Hillcrest and North Park. The arrest and apprehension stemmed from a Security Officer observing the defendant “trying to set fire to a (wood) pallet.”

It is important to note, however, the mere fact the individual was taken into custody, to be held and/or detained  for what appears to be a criminal offense should not in and of itself be the basis for one to conclude he is guilty of the charges in question or any other crime. Perhaps a person of prudent sense may have reason to believe the crime of arson was taking place in the case of the wood pallet, but the true and complete set of facts and circumstances must be known in order to justify more than a suspicion. And, we do not convict people in the United States on the basis of a notion or belief; instead, the prosecution must present and establish evidence beyond any doubt to obtain a conviction.
The article noted the police were “questioning” the man in connection with the other fires; however, a whole panoply of rights must first come into play. No one can lawfully be interrogated while in custody without being informed and admonished of their Fifth Amendment rights under the U.S. Constitution against self-incrimination and their right to counsel under the Sixth Amendment. This is more commonly known as the Miranda warning. While the police may interrogate a person in custody, they cannot use that person’s statements and admissions to incriminate him in a later criminal trial. The U.S. Supreme Court in 1966 in the landmark case of Miranda vs. Arizona, established a set of guidelines that require law enforcement prior to an interrogation to (1) clearly and explicitly inform a defendant so he is adequately and fully informed of his right to remain silent; (2)  that anything he says can and will be used against him in Court; (3) that he has the right to consult with a lawyer; (4) that the attorney would be present during any questioning by law enforcement; (5) if he cannot afford a lawyer, one would be provided to represent him at no cost; and for the  warning to be deemed proper and, therefore, meaningful, (6) the suspect must be asked if he understands these rights. Because of various levels of education and to avoid any ambiguity, it has often been argued by criminal defense counsel that an affirmative answer of “yes” to each of the elements of the above warring must occur.  Some states further provide that a juvenile be advised of his right to remain silent unless his parent or guardian is present.”

SAM SPITAL

ICE on the lookout for drug smugglers crossing into San Diego

The United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) office is taking action to combat drug smugglers that are luring Tijuana citizens to participate in alleged drug trafficking operations that move narcotics across the U.S. border into San Diego.

According to ICE officials, the Tijuana ‘drug lords’ are placing ads in local newspapers alerting citizens of what appear to be reputable employment opportunities involving transporting company vehicles across the border. These jobs later turn out to be fronts for drug trafficking operations, often resulting in the innocent drivers being arrested and charged with federal drug crimes when they reach California.

Since 2011, ICE has apprehended and arrested nearly 40 such drivers at the San Diego border. This reportedly led to the seizure of 100 pounds of methamphetamine, 75 pounds of cocaine and more than 3,300 pounds of marijuana.

To alert Tijuana residents of the potential of arrest and criminal penalties, ICE has placed ads of its own into the two main newspapers in Tijuana. “Warning! Drug traffickers are announcing employment for drivers to cross to the United States,” the ads read. “Don’t be a victim of the smuggler’s trap.”

ICE says that, in most cases, the drivers suspected that something was amiss. However, needing gainful employment, they were willing to overlook the inconsistencies and irregularities for the promise of a much-needed paycheck.

For example, one Tijuana man told officers that he had searched the vehicle, suspecting that his new employer may have been up to something illegal. Despite his search, he did not find the 30 pounds of cocaine that were packed into the gas tank, which ultimately led to his arrest when he reached the U.S.

J.D.B. v. North Carolina Summary (Juvenile Crimes; Criminal Defenses Miranda Warning)

On June 16, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court in the landmark case of J.D.B. v. North Carolina, Case # 09-111121, https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-11121.pdf

held police must consider age and school setting when questioning a child and, therefore, whether they are required to give a Miranda warning. This case involved a thirteen year old seventh grade special education student who was removed from his class, and then taken to a closed door meeting with the school Assistant Principal and questioned by police regarding two burglaries. The U.S. Supreme Court determined that children would not reasonably believe they could leave a room when questioned by police in a school setting and, therefore, must be given a Miranda warning. In other words, this type of a setting was deemed overly coercive because children inherently obey authority and are generally under the belief they must remain in the office and answer questions by a school administrator.

Neither the police nor the school administrators first advised the thirteen year old student of (1) his right to remain silent pursuant to the Miranda warning when questioned; (2) that he was free to leave the room; nor (3) was he afforded an opportunity to talk with his grandmother or legal guardian. After questioning for about forty-five minutes, the student admitted to the burglaries. Juvenile petitions were filed against him, and after a hearing the court adjudicated J.D.B. delinquent. The North Carolina Court of Appeals affirmed as did the North Carolina Supreme Court, holding he was not in custody when he confessed to require a Miranda warning. The U.S. Supreme Court granted Certiorari and reversed the judgment of the state Supreme Court. Essentially, children must be given the same Miranda procedural safeguards that are guaranteed to adults.

Ratings and Reviews

BBB 10.0Samuel Eugene Spital
Samuel E. SpitalClients’ ChoiceAward 2021 Samuel Eugene SpitalClients’ ChoiceAward 2020
avvo rated 10/10 in Criminal Defense avvo rated 10/10 in Juvenile Law avvo rated 10/10 in Licensing
avvo rated 10/10 in Personal Injury Top ContributorAward 2012Samuel Eugene Spital Samuel Eugene SpitalReviewsout of 207 reviews