Posts Tagged ‘Criminal Defense New Orleans’

Secret Injections and Messy Justice!

 

On Tuesday, April 29, 2014 two convicted murderers were set to be given lethal injections for their crimes in Oklahoma. Clayton D. Lockett and Charles F. Warner were to be Oklahoma’s latest executions. As the clock drew down on Mr. Lockett he was supposed to be given his last meal, marched down to the execution chamber, strapped down, injected with a cocktail of lethal drugs and peacefully pass away….or so the authorities thought!

 

Normally, and in the recent past in the U.S., the practice of injecting a person with a fatal dose of drugs was pretty straight-forward and often provided a quick end to a troubled life. The inmate would first fall asleep as the first drug entered his circulatory system. As the second drug is administered, his respiratory system would slow to a halt. The last drug would stop the heart, rendering the person dead. In essence, this was a humane approach to deadly justice. That’s the way it is supposed to work, at least.

 

As the world and European countries have begun to shun the practice of capital punishment, these drugs have become increasingly harder to obtain and have led the states to increasingly dramatic attempts to procure replacements. Now, many of these drugs originate from dubious and secretive origins.  To make matters worse, many courts have ruled that the prisons do not have to divulge the new supplier of these drugs, as was the case in Oklahoma.  Furthermore, the drugs that are now being used are still in the experimental phase.  Thus, the inmate is essentially a capital punishment guinea pig.  This climate of secrecy and mystery makes it impossible to know whether these executions will comport with the Constitution’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

 

This brings us to the common argument of who cares if he experienced pain or agony.  He still didn’t suffer as much as his victims.  This common sentiment may be a form of justice to some people but it certainly is not law and order.

 

I think that it is possible to support the death penalty and still be morally disgusted by the idea of torturing a man to death, especially under circumstances where those in charge knew or should have known their conduct would violate the Eighth Amendment’s “Cruel and unusual Punishment” clause.  If my beliefs are incorrect, then I ask those with such sentiments if, living in an uncivilized society is acceptable to them.  Within the past 48 hours, the best statement I’ve come across on this issue is

 

“An eye-for-an-eye does not raise anyone up; it just brings us down to the level of the condemned.”

 

The parents of Clayton D. Lockett’s victim released a statement to the press just prior to the execution, “We are thankful this day has finally arrived and justice will finally be served.”  I ask the question, “Has justice been served?”  In Oklahoma’s haste to execute Lockett, this convicted murderer has been elevated to a level that he does not deserve and never would have achieved had Oklahoma respected the basic requirements of due process.  Lockett’s name and photo have been all over the news.  The horrible acts that he perpetrated have quickly been forgotten.  He has become a victim of bureaucracy.  Ten years from now, students in criminal justice courses may read about him in text books. Did Oklahoma provide these parents with any amount of closure to help them heal from this tragedy?  It appears more as if the state betrayed these poor people.

 

This is not a pro or anti death penalty debate.  Quite frankly, I am tired of arguing that issue.  I think that the most important lesson for us to learn is that regardless of how we feel about capital punishment, due process and the Eight Amendment serve to protect us all: the victims, the convicted and society in general.  If we are going to have a Death Penalty- we must do it right.  Until this process becomes transparent, we are only hurting ourselves.

 

 

Second Degree Cruelty to Juvenile — Louisiana

New Orleans Criminal Defense Attorney

 

Elizabeth B. Carpenter — Criminal Attorney Contact 

 

Second Degree Cruelty to Juveniles — La RS 14:93.2.3

Second Degree Cruelty to juveniles is:

A.(1)  Second degree cruelty to juveniles is the intentional or criminally negligent mistreatment or neglect by anyone over the age of 17 to any child under the age of 17 which causes serious bodily injury or neurological impairment to that child.

(2)  For purposes of this Section, “serious bodily injury” means bodily injury involving protracted and obvious disfigurement or protracted loss or impairment of the function of a bodily member, organ, or mental faculty, or substantial risk of death.

B.  The providing of treatment by a parent or tutor in accordance with the tenets of a well-recognized religious method of healing, in lieu of medical treatment, shall not for that reason alone be considered to be intentional or criminally negligent mistreatment or neglect and shall be an affirmative defense to a prosecution under this Section.

Penalties

Whoever commits the crime of second degree cruelty to juveniles shall be imprisoned at hard labor for not more than 40 years.

This offense is considered a Crime of Violence, therefore it is not expungeable.  However, it is a crime for which jail time is not mandatory — one may receive probation only.

 

New Louisiana Bill Aims to Create the Crime of Unlawful Storage of a Firearm

New Orleans Weapons Crimes Attorney

 

Elizabeth B. Carpenter — Weapons and Gun Defense Attorney

 

The Louisiana News Bureau has just announced a proposed bill that aims to create the crime of unlawful storage of a firearm.    This is House Bill 4 by Rep Norton.The proposed law provides that it is unlawful to keep or store a firearm unless it is in a locked container or is equipped with a lock to render the firearm inoperable.

 

The law proposes the following penalties:

First violation of a fine of not more than $300.

Second or subsequent violation of a fine of not more than $500, imprisonment for not more than six months, or both.

Proposed law creates an exception if the firearm is on the person or is in use.

 

With all due respect to Rep. Norton, I think that this is the most ridiculous piece of legislation.  I would like to understand the purpose of it.  Will this make the public safer?  In light of the recent gun related tragedies in Colorado and Connecticut, I think that we are going to see a lot of proposed frivolous legislation such as this.  Again, I think that this in a legislative intent to fix a symptom instead of a problem.  What was the real issue in the recent massacres in Co. and Ct?  The lack of sufficient funding and options for mental health treatment in this country.

 

If you have been accused of a gun or weapons crime in the New Orleans area, contact Elizabeth B. Carpenter to schedule a consultation.  We are ready to take action and stand by your side.

 

 

United States Supreme Court Cases To Follow This Week — Criminal Defense Attorney New Orleans

By: Elizabeth B Carpenter

New Orleans Criminal Defense Attorney

 

Elizabeth B. Carpenter, Esq. — New Orleans Premiere Criminal Defense Attorney

 


Serving Clients in Orleans Parish, St. Tammany Parish, St. John Parish, St. James Parish, St. Bernard Parish, St. Charles Parish, Assumption Parish, Tangipahoa Parish, Terrebonne Parish, Plaquemines Parish and Jefferson Parish.

 

The following cases are being argued before the U.S. Supreme Court this week:

 

BAILEY V. UNITED STATES

Can police officers may detain an individual incident to the execution of a search warrant when the individual has left the immediate vicinity of the premises before the warrant is executed.

 

CHAIDEZ V. UNITED STATES

In Padilla v. Kentucky, 130 S. Ct. 1473 (2010), this Court held that criminal defendants receive ineffective assistance of counsel under the Sixth Amendment when their attorneys fail to advise them that pleading guilty to an offense will subject them to deportation. The question presented is whether Padilla applies to persons whose convictions became final before its announcement.

 

FLORIDA V. JARDINES

Is a dog sniff at the front door of a suspected grow house by a trained narcotics detection dog is a Fourth Amendment search requiring probable cause?

 

FLORIDA V. HARRIS

Is an alert by a well-trained narcotics detection dog certified to detect illegal contraband insufficient to establish probable cause for the search of a vehicle?

 

 

Video Voyeurism / Voyeurism / Peeping Tom — St. Tammany Parish

Criminal Defense Attorney New Orleans

 

Elizabeth B. Carpenter, Esq. – Sex Crimes Attorney New Orleans

 

Elizabeth B Carpenter Law is one of Louisiana’s premiere law firms representing clients who are accused of Sex Offenses including Voyeurism. If you have been accused of a Sex Crime, contact our office today to schedule a consultation. Video Voyeurism is not an offense to be taken lightly; it is a Sex Crime.  Your freedom is important to us!

 

Voyeurism — La. R.S. 14:283.1

Voyeurism is the viewing, observing, spying upon, or invading the privacy of a person by looking through the doors, windows, or other openings of a private residence without the consent of the victim who has a reasonable expectation of privacy for the purpose of arousing or gratifying the sexual desires of the offender.

 

Penalties

First Conviction: fined not more than $500.00, imprisoned for not more than 6 months, or both.

Second or Subsequent Conviction: fined not more than $1,000.00, imprisoned with or without hard labor for not more than 1 year, or both.

 

Anyone who is convicted of the crime Voyeurim must register as a Sex Offender with the state for 15 years to be conducted annually.

 

Video Voyeurism — La R.S. 14:243

Video Voyeurism is the use of any camera, videotape, photo-optical, photo-electric, or any other image recording device for the purpose of observing, viewing, photographing, filming, or videotaping a person where that person has not consented to the observing, viewing, photographing, filming, or videotaping and it is for a lewd or lascivious purpose.

 

Penalties

First Conviction: fined not more than $2,000.00 or imprisoned, with or without hard labor, for not more than 2 years, or both.

Second or Subsequent Conviction: fined not more than $2,000 and imprisoned at hard labor for 6 months to 3 years without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence.

 

Penalty Enahncements

** Whoever commits the crime of video voyeurism when the observing, viewing, photographing, filming, or videotaping is of any vaginal or anal sexual intercourse, actual or simulated sexual intercourse, masturbation, any portion of the female breast below the top of the areola or of any portion of the pubic hair, anus, cleft of the buttocks, vulva, or genitals shall be fined not more than $10,000 and be imprisoned at hard labor for 1 to 5 years, without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence. ***

** Whoever commits the crime of video voyeurism when the observing, viewing, photographing, filming, or videotaping is of any child under the age of 17 with the intention of arousing or gratifying the sexual desires of the offender shall be fined not more than $10,000.00 and be imprisoned at hard labor for 2 to 10 years without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence. **

 

Anyone who is convicted of the crime Video Voyeurim must register as a Sex Offender with the state for 15 years to be conducted annually.

 

Peeping Tom — La R.S. 14:284

No person shall perform such acts as will make him a “Peeping Tom” on or about the premises of another, or go upon the premises of another for the purpose of becoming a “Peeping Tom.”

“Peeping Tom” means one who peeps through windows or doors, or other like places, situated on or about the premises of another for the purpose of spying upon or invading the privacy of persons spied upon without the consent of the persons spied upon.  The person does not have to be actually on the premises of another.

Whoever violates this Section shall be fined not more than$500.00, or imprisoned for not more 6 months, or both.

 

Elizabeth B. Carpenter, Esq. — New Orleans Criminal Defense Attorney

 

Unlawful use of a Laser on a Police Officer — Louisiana

New Orleans Criminal Defense Attorney

 

Elizabeth B. Carpenter, Esq. — New Orleans Premiere Criminal Defense Attorney


Serving Clients in Orleans Parish, St. Tammany Parish, St. John Parish, St. James Parish, St. Bernard Parish, St. Charles Parish, Assumption Parish, Tangipahoa Parish, Terrebonne Parish, Plaquemines Parish and Jefferson Parish.

 

 

Unlawful use of a Laser on a Police Officer — La RS 14:37.3

Unlawful use of a laser on a police officer is the intentional projection of a laser on or at a police officer without consent of the officer when the offender has reasonable grounds to believe the officer is a police officer acting in the performance of his duty and that the officer will be injured, intimidated, or placed in fear of bodily harm.

Whoever commits the crime of unlawful use of a laser on a police officer shall be fined not more than $500.00 dollars or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both.

 
 

Unauthorized Use of a Movable — Louisiana

New Orleans Criminal Defense Attorney

 

Elizabeth B. Carpenter, Esq. — New Orleans Premiere Criminal Defense Attorney


Serving Clients in Orleans Parish, St. Tammany Parish, St. John Parish, St. James Parish, St. Bernard Parish, St. Charles Parish, Assumption Parish, Tangipahoa Parish, Terrebonne Parish, Plaquemines Parish and Jefferson Parish.

 

 

Unauthorized Use of a Movable

Unauthorized use of a movable is the intentional taking or use of a movable which belongs to another, either without the other’s consent, or by means of fraudulent conduct, practices, or representations, but without any intention to deprive the other of the movable permanently.  The fact that the movable so taken or used may be classified as an immovable, according to the law pertaining to civil matters, is immaterial.

Whoever commits the crime of unauthorized use of a movable having a value of $500.00 dollars or less shall be fined not more than $500.00 dollars, imprisoned for not more than 6 months, or both.  Whoever commits the crime of unauthorized use of a movable having a value in excess of $500.00 dollars shall be fined not more than $5,000.00 dollars, imprisoned with or without hard labor for not more than 5 years, or both.

Organized Retail Theft — Louisiana

 

New Orleans Criminal Theft Defense Attorney

Elizabeth B. Carpenter, Esq. —  Criminal Attorney New Orleans 

 

If you have been charged with Theft — you need a good lawyer on your side to fight for your rights!

 

Organized Retail Theft — La RS 14:67.25

Organized retail theft is the intentional procuring, receiving, or concealing of stolen retail property with the intent to sell, deliver, or distribute that property.

It shall be presumptive evidence that the owner or operator of any retail establishment has violated this Section when:

(1)  On more than one occasion within any one-hundred-eighty-day period the offender has intentionally possessed, procured, received, or concealed stolen retail property; and

(2)  The stolen retail property was possessed, procured, received, or concealed from or on behalf of any person who:

(a)  Did not have a proper business license; or

(b)  Did not pay sales or use taxes to the state or the appropriate local government subdivision in the jurisdiction where the possessing, procuring, receiving, or concealing took place for the transfer of the items to the owner or operator of the retail establishment; or

(c)  Accepted a cash payment for the stolen retail property and did not provide the owner or operator of the possessing, procuring, receiving, or concealing retail establishment an invoice for the sale.

 

Penalties

Whoever commits the crime of organized retail theft when the aggregate amount of the misappropriation, taking, purchasing, possessing, procuring, receiving, or concealing in any one-hundred-eighty-day period amounts to a value less than five hundred dollars shall be imprisoned with or without hard labor for not more than two years, or may be fined not more than two thousand dollars, or both.

Whoever commits the crime of organized retail theft when the aggregate amount of the misappropriation, taking, purchasing, possessing, procuring, receiving, or concealing in any one-hundred-eighty-day period amounts to a value more than five hundred dollars shall be imprisoned with or without hard labor for not more than ten years, or may be fined not more than ten thousand dollars, or both.

Cheating and Swindling — Louisiana

New Orleans White Collar Crime Defense Attorney

 

 

Elizabeth B. Carpenter, Esq. — White Collar Crime New Orleans

 

 Cheating and Swindling — La RS 14:67.18

A.  It shall be unlawful for any person who by any trick or sleight of hand performance, or by fraud or fraudulent scheme, cards, dice, or device, for himself or another, wins or attempts to win money or property or a combination thereof, or reduces a losing wager or attempts to reduce a losing wager, increases a winning wager or attempts to increase a winning wager in connection with gaming operations.

B.(1)  Whoever violates the provisions of this Section when the value of such money or property or combination thereof or reduced or increased wager amounts to a value of one thousand five hundred dollars or more shall be imprisoned, with or without hard labor, for not more than ten years, or may be fined not more than three thousand dollars, or both.

(2)  When the value of such money or property or combination thereof or reduced or increased wager amounts to a value of five hundred dollars or more, but less than a value of one thousand five hundred dollars, the offender shall be imprisoned, with or without hard labor, for not more than five years, or may be fined not more than two thousand dollars, or both.

(3)  When the value of such money or property or combination thereof or reduced or increased wager amounts to less than a value of five hundred dollars, the offender shall be imprisoned for not more than six months, or may be fined not more than five hundred dollars, or both. If the offender in such cases has been convicted of cheating and swindling two or more times previously, upon any subsequent conviction he shall be imprisoned, with or without hard labor, for not more than two years, or may be fined not more than two thousand dollars, or both.

 

Facing an indictment for a white collar crime is one of the most difficult experiences one could possibly endure. In addition to whatever consequences a conviction might bring, including prison time and permanent felony conviction on your record, a white collar crime charge can do lasting damage to your reputation and tear apart your family, even if you are not convicted. Elizabeth B. Carpenter, Law understands the stress that you are experiencing. Our job is to minimize any potential damage to your future and protect your rights.

Theft of Motor Vehicle Fuel — Louisiana

 

New Orleans Criminal Theft Defense Attorney

Elizabeth B. Carpenter, Esq. —  Criminal Attorney New Orleans 

 

If you have been charged with Theft — you need a good lawyer on your side to fight for your rights!

 

Theft of Motor Vehicle Fuel — La RS 14:67.17

No person shall dispense fuel, including gasoline and diesel, into the fuel tank of a motor vehicle at an establishment in which motor gasoline or diesel is offered for retail sale and leave the premises of the establishment unless the payment or authorized charge for the fuel has been made.

Whoever violates the provisions of this Section shall be subject to a fine or imprisonment or both, in accordance with the penalties prescribed in R.S. 14:67.

In addition, the driver’s license of any person violating the provisions of this Section shall be suspended upon conviction or plea of guilty or nolo contendere.  Upon a first conviction, the driver’s license suspension shall be for a period not to exceed 6 months.  Upon a second or subsequent conviction, the suspension shall be for a period not to exceed one year.  Upon conviction or plea of guilty or nolo contendere, the court shall surrender the driver’s license to the Department of Public Safety and Corrections for suspension in accordance with the provisions of this Section.

 

Contact Elizabeth B. Carpenter, Esq. to schedule a Consultation today!