Lady Liberty

Contact us

 
 
 
 

We look forward to hearing from you and try to answer all of your questions within two business days.

Russell S. Babcock
Attorney at Law - Certified Specialist, Criminal Law

1901 First Avenue, Suite 138 San Diego CA 92101

Archive for the ‘English blog’ Category

Congratulations Ryan Mardock For Passing the Cal. Bar!

Saturday, November 20th, 2010

On November 19, 2010, Ryan passed the California Bar Exam on his first attempt.

Many of you have already met Ryan and know him for his genuine caring about our clients and their rights.

Ryan completed his doctorate  from the  California Western School of Law. He completed his undergraduate degree at Oregon State University in language studies. Ryan received the highest grade in his law school class, the American Jurisprudence Award, in Advanced Criminal Justice and Advanced Scholarly Writing. He is a member of La Raza and is active in civil rights and the Hispanic community.
Ryan is from Oregon and enjoys fishing and surfing. He lived in Spain for five and one half years and in Nicaragua for several months.

Ryan is truly a “people person” and will bring a level of high energy and strong level of personal commitment to the clients he will serve in the Law Office of Russell Babcock.

We are happy and proud that you passed on your first attempt, Ryan. !

Attorney Receives “miraculous sentence” in federal methamphetamine case

Wednesday, November 17th, 2010

The grandmother of my client, Armando L. had traveled from Mexico to attend the sentencing hearing in front of United States District Court Judge Anhello. With a crucifix in hand in court, she said that she was praying for a miracle for her grandson, who facing a probable sentence of at least five years custody.

The sentence that Armando received today was nothing short of miraculous. While he was initial facing a potential sentence of life imprisonment, through aggressive negotiations with the U.S. Attorney , the government decided to recommend an unusually low sentence of approximately five years.

After my office submitted extensive sentencing documents and reference letters from Armando’s family members , the judge decided that a sentence of only thirty six months was appropriate. The judge focused on the extensive documentation of Armando’s employment history, lack of criminal record, and extensive ties to the community. This is a surprising and unprecedented sentence for multi ounce and numerous deliveries of meth.

Like Armando’s grandmother, I believe that miracles happen from time to time in the court. But in my law office we put in the extensive work and background investigation to maximize the chance for the best sentencing result like that which occurred today.

I know that I will savor the delicious taste of Abuela Rosa’s chili rellenos . And so will Armando, who will probably be free in less than fourteen months instead of ten years after credit for time served and completing the Bureau of Prisons’s drug program.

Congratulations to Armando .L and to his family for all the hard work and assistance that you gave to my office in helping to achieve this miraculous result. And thanks to the prayers and the presence of Armando’s grandmother, Rosa.

?

?

How do I eliminate or expunge my criminal record?

Sunday, July 4th, 2010

I am contacted by many clients who have successfully completed all or part of a period of probation and they now wish to have their criminal record eliminated. This can be very helpful when applying for employment, when seeking to remain in the United States lawfully or become a United States citizen, and also to avoid police harassment during routine traffic stops. I have had several clients barred from going on vacations to Canada, including boarding a cruise ship that passes through Canadian waters, until their previous record was dismissed.

The procedure for dismissing a criminal record after successful completion of probation is called expungement. It is best to hire an attorney for this procedure for several reasons: First, if you are still on probation, a motion must be brought to shorten the probationary period. Second, certain crimes do not qualify for this relief. Finally, the government often opposes the petition.

After the petition for expungement has been granted, the charges are dismissed and the individual does not have to tell future employers of the previous criminal conviction. The previous conviction still has to be disclosed for most government employment and forms, though the effect of the dismissed conviction is often minor.

Don’t let your previous criminal record continue to prejudice you after you have already paid the price for your conviction. Contact the Law Offices of Russell S. Babcock today for your free consultation regarding expungement. We have helped hundreds of individuals in the same position as you clean and eliminate their criminal records.

How do I erase my arrest record?

Sunday, July 4th, 2010

I am contacted by many clients who have been arrested but who were never charged with a criminal offense. They wish to have their arrest record cleared or erased so that it will not show up in an employment check or during a routine traffic stop. Also, having your arrest record cleared may help for immigration purposes.

There is a procedure for sealing and destroying an arrest record. It is generally a two step process that first involves petitioning the government agency involved in the arrest, and then, if necessary schedule a court hearing. If the petition is granted, the arrest record must be destroyed and taken out of the law enforcement data bases.

It is best to have an attorney handle this procedure since the government almost always opposes this request, and the procedure to have your arrest record destroyed may be difficult. At the Law Office of Russell S. Babcock, we have helped many people clear their arrest records, and we look forward to consulting with you regarding your case.

Russell Babcock has obtained spectacular results in many cases in May and June.

Saturday, July 3rd, 2010

1. R.S. had robbery charge, which carried a state prison term, reduced to one count of petty theft . He paid a small fine and received no jail time.

2. R.G. was charged with burglary and shoplifting large quantities of clothes with two girlfriends. The two other defendants pled to theft. R.G , Mr. Babcock’s client pled to trespass, received probation and was allowed to keep her job in a financially sensitive position.

3. S.K. was charged with six felony counts for submitting false insurance claims. His case was reduced to one misdemeanor count, with no jail time and the possibility of the dismissal of the charge after eighteen months to three years.

4. S.M was charged with cultivating approximately one hundred fifty marijuana plants and stealing power from utility company. Theft charges were dismissed against client with client to plead to a felony cultivation charge a simple misdemeanor possession charge with the felony to be dismissed in eighteen months. It is anticipated that client will be able to keep his professional license and will receive no jail time .

5. B.A. reinstated to diversion program after failing to appear in court for more than three years. It is anticipated that he will have charges against him dismissed in eighteen months and will be able to retain his lawful immigration status.

6. J.C. charged with spousal domestic violence. The charge was reduced to simple battery, and J.C, is reunited with spouse and baby with no jail time.

Results cannot not be compared to predict the outcome in your case. But the Law Office of Russell S. Babcock has obtained a spectacular record of both trial and negotiated results. We always strive for the best for every client!

Colombia: More Than Coffee and Cocaine

Wednesday, May 19th, 2010

There are two countries that I have visited in my lifetime that truly deserve the adjective “intriguing” to describe them. They are intriguing not because they are a perfect vacation destination or an ideal place for all American travelers, but because they are both countries that are a myriad of contradictions, legally, politically and culturally. I am talking about the Republics of Cuba and Colombia—even the word Republic is a bit of a misnomer for these places. The subject of my blog today is Colombia, please spell it correctly, not Columbia like the Capitol District or the University, but C-O-L-O-M-B-I-A.

Today, I must break the cardinal rule of blogging, which is to stay with one theme–law– but write first a little bit about the country and the people. Colombia is indeed a land of twists and turns, hot and cold, much like its diverse climate and topography.

What I like most about Colombia is the Colombians. Despite many living in abject poverty, you would never know it from their attitude or dress. Even a young woman from “estrata uno”, the lowest economic level, will apply make-up like a model and walk through the dusty streets of her barrio with her head held high.

Colombia is a country rich in music, cuisine, and laughter and has a complicated and high culture that most Americans never truly understand. They are some of the most educated and hard working people that I have ever met, very family oriented, and only lacking one benefit that we have in this country that many of us take for granted—opportunity.

So, now for the legal part. How do Colombians get extradited here? It is almost never for crimes committed directly in the United States, but for their activities in Colombia that in the words of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals have a “nexus” or connection to the United States.

What the nexus rule means is that an individual like a former client of mine, Jhon, could be extradited to the United States for helping to arrange for small boats to smuggle drugs between an island off the coast of Nicaragua, belonging to Colombia–San Andres– to another island a few miles away in Nicaragua. Jhon never imagined that for his relatively small role in narcotics activity in his own country that he would be held by U.S. officials in the nastiest jail in Colombia, Combita, in the high mountains of the Andes, and brought at machine gun point, double shackled to a courthouse in San Diego, California to stand trial for drug crimes against the United States. What Jhon didn’t realize is that the drugs that originated in Colombia, and then were transported to Nicaragua, continued onto Mexico by people he had never met and some of the drugs may have arrived in the United States. So, under current law, since there was a substantial chance that Jhon’s seemingly restricted activities affected the United States, he could be legally extradited to this country.

I have found in my representation of several Colombian nationals, who were extradited to the United States that most of them don’t represent the stereotypical drug lord but, they are individuals living in poverty and who never imaged the harm that their activities could have on this country.

.

Second, extraditions may actually create more violence. There have been several extraditions of mid-level drug bosses connected with “La Oficina” , (The Office) to the United States from Medellin, Colombia. When the individuals are taken out of the community, bloody battles and turf wars ensue causing a destabilization of the drug distribution hierarchy. This is exactly what happened in Tijuana, Mexico when Javier Arellano-Felix was brought to San Diego. I don’t think it was a coincidence that violence in Tijuana increased ten-fold while the old Arellano- Felix gang was jockeying for power with those who wanted to move in on the leadership void.

Extraditions also may have a political component allowing a government to rid itself of political enemies.

I do not believe that the routine extradition of Colombians to the United States, those who have committed relatively minor offenses purely in their own country such as Jhon, further the interest of either the American or Colombian justice systems. I call upon the President of Colombia, Alvaro Uribe, to establish an effective court system within Colombia and not simply extradite his problems to the United States.

The United States government has a special responsibility to those that it brings here through extradition because often they are individuals who know nothing about this country, do not have family here, and are confused by the American justice system and why they have been brought here. At the law offices of Russell S. Babcock, we will continue to fight to insure that individuals from all countries who are accused of crimes be treated fairly and that they do not receive an enhanced sentence out of fear or prejudice.

Boycott Arizona–SB 1070

Sunday, May 9th, 2010

“Boycott Arizona Even Though “It Is Not The Grand Canyon’s Fault”

The subject of my blog, or as some of my loyal readers call it, my rant, is SB 1070. I have renamed this law NXHA, ‘The National Xenophobic1 Hate Act’ (I tried to turn the X into a swastika, but my computer, at least not yet, doesn’t have this symbol.
This law requires state police officers in Arizona to arrest, yes ARREST, an individual who does not have a document on his person proving lawful U.S. residency or citizenship when the suspect “looks” like someone who is in the United States illegally.

Apart from the blatant racism of such a law, I don’t think that its supporters have even pondered many of its ramifications. The reality is that more than ten million people who are living in the United States illegally. Many of them are witnesses to crimes or crime victims themselves. Obviously, now they will not want to come forward to report crimes or be witnesses for the fear of being deported. And now, the scarce resources of state police have to be diverted away from their mission of fighting violent crime to becoming low level United States immigration officials.

The focus of the law has been on its impact on illegal immigrants. but we should be just as worried about the many lawful U.S. residents and lawful residents that NXHA affects. My sports trainer, Mike, has a Middle Eastern wife, who is a naturalized U.S. citizen. Even in the post-Gardner era, she likes to go on morning jogs alone or with her girlfriends. If she were living in Arizona, she would have to carry an identification card with her always or be subject to arrest. Or maybe she could get by if she went on her runs only in Gucci jogging suits.  Have we forgotten that we are a country, with the exception of very few Native Americans, of  the progeny of immigrants from all colors, races, and countries?

Many naturalized U.S. citizens who were born in Mexico remain very close to their roots…living close to the border and crossing on a daily or weekly basis to visit their family on “the other side.” I live in San Diego, the busiest border crossing port in the world, and I often travel to Mexico for business. I certainly can’t tell “them” apart (the lawful Hispanic residents from the undocumented aliens. If the litmus test is dirty shoes, then if I were Hispanic, I would probably have been in jail by now. I have been known to go out and water my garden in the morning in my suit and work shoes before racing off to work–dirty shoes, even once in the courtroom.

As I think about NXHA, I remember my two trips to Cuba. I remember police standing on almost every street corner asking identification of any Cuban who appeared to be a resident from outside of Havana. I remember the embarrassment on their faces as they were interrogated at length about their place of residence because in Cuba you are assigned to live in certain zones in the country and can be fined or imprisoned if you are found in another section without the government permission.

A few years ago US citizens could cross the border on merely a declaration of U.S. citizenship. Now we are all required to carry passports at the port of entry or be subject to fines and detention. And now in Arizona under NXHA, any non-White lawful resident or U.S. citizen must carry identification at all times or risk being arrested. In essence, in Arizona, one must be prepared to prove at anytime that they are a U.S. citizen.

Sadly, we are not far from the day when we will all be required to carry a National identity card at all times (you won’t be safe by being a member of the White middle class anymore). This card is required already in many oppressive countries such as Cuba. Our national identity card will probably be the U.S. passport or the passport card, which is a US passport that is manufactured in the convenient size of a driver’s license in anticipation of the day requiring that we all be required to carry identification or be subject to arrest and prosecution.

 I don’t know how many of you have noticed that the new passports have microchips in them, and with the current technology, it would not be hard to embed a GPS device in them. All of this will be done in the name of “patriotism” or “national security.”

The law could begin as follows:

“Anyone who travels within a “designated safety zone” is required to carry a passport or be subject to arrest and imprisonment.”

At first, a safety zone could be defined as within twenty miles of a border, a military base, etc. etc., and later be extended to include coastlines, government bases, and federal land, until eventually the entire country is covered.

Every day we come closer to living in a police state under a system like Cuba, which, by the way, has a constitution that reads very similar to the Unites States Constitution. Cuba has freedom of press, assembly, and travel just like us only that it has been interpreted to be “freedom that is consistent with the security of the state.” Cuba indeed is very safe, with virtually no terrorism or serious violent crime, but at what price?

Of course, there is a strong need to continue to curtail terrorism and internal crime but NXHA is not the way. Illegal aliens are certainly not the primary threat to our national security. When an economy goes bad as it did in Nazi Germany and there is much civil unrest and unhappiness, politicians and the citizens of a country search for a scapegoat. That is what NXHA is all about.

One of the main joys and rights of living in this country is being able to go to the beach or go for a walk or jog and not have to take your wallet nor risk being stopped by the police unless you are doing something wrong. All that changes now under NXHA.

I urge you to boycott all goods and products made in Arizona and not travel to that state until NXHA is ultimately repealed or thrown out by the courts. And, please join the fight so that this cancer does not spread to your state.

I had hoped to go see the Grand Canyon again this year, but it will have to wait for awhile even though as a friend said, “it is not the Grand Canyon’s fault.”

The Death Penalty: “A Hollow Promise”

Sunday, April 25th, 2010

When I got up this morning at 6:00 a.m. to write this blog that I have had on my mind for the last month, I was pleased that there was a very well-written article by James Wikens in the “San Diego Union”, April 25, 2010 on one of my two topics.

There are two lessons to be learned from the Chelsea King and Amber Dubois tragedy: first, that more laws do not eliminate criminal behavior; and second that the death penalty is indeed being applied in a capricious manner in the United States and is dysfunctional and untenable.

There is a saying among criminal defense attorneys that bad facts make bad law. Here, out of justifiable rage, California legislators are rushing to pass unwise and unjustifiable new legislation to make penalties more severe for sex offenders.

We must ask ourselves several key questions: do we really want to lock up a nineteen year old for life who touches the buttocks of a seventeen year old girl while he is drunk at a party? What about all of the sex offenders, which probably number at least 65%, who are rehabilitated and re-join their families to live good lives– do we really want to remove them from society, forever? And who is going to pay for all this additional incarceration in a state that is already near bankrupt?

To take the reasoning of the “Chelsea’s Law” advocates to its logical conclusion, we should lock up every drunk driving offender for life because we shouldn’t take a chance that they might re-offend some day and kill someone. Both the premise and conclusion of Chelsea’s Law are flawed: certainly not all individuals who commit sexual misconduct are like John Gardner, and second, there are already very strict laws on the book that send the most serious sex offenders to jail for life or a very long period of time.

The Greek philosopher, Sencea, once said that the more corrupt a society becomes, the more laws it passes. By this measure, California has become the paradigm of corruption. Do we really think that if a “Chelsea’s Law” had been in place that John Gardner would have reasoned, “well I guess I am not going to kill those two girls because I could go to jail for life,” and that it would have prevented these crimes? The bottom line is there has always been a certain amount of sexual deviancy in every society and people, not bad laws, commit crime.

And now to turn to the article in the “San Diego Union” and the death penalty, I, who have handled four death penalty appeals. must ask myself several questions. First why is a client like mine, Eduardo Vargas, a gentlemen convicted of homicide in a street robbery gone bad and who was very young at the time of his crime and with no felony criminal record given the death penalty, when a multiple killer with a prior record for a serious sex crimes, John Gardner, offered life imprisonment? As an attorney who does death penalty litigation, I know that the public’s support, albeit waning , for the death penalty is based on fear and misinformation. As the article in the San Diego Union indicates, a death sentence costs tax payers ten times the money of a life sentence because of increased security costs and all the costs associated with death litigation. A prior military person, who suffered from post-traumatic stress syndrome and heard helicopter noises at the time of his participation in a robbery-homicide, was executed in California, and John Gardner, no —why? The Uni-Bomber in Washington States gets a life sentence in large part due to do the skill and brilliance of my colleague whom I respect greatly, Judy Clarke, and my client, who received a court appointed attorney at trial and whom I was appointed to defend after his sentence was imposed gets death–again, is this fair? Am I missing something?

The California Supreme Court defends such disparate sentences by cloaking their decisions in the legalese that the Court is not required to find inter-case sentencing proportionality…in other words just because one defendant got a break doesn’t mean the sentence of the other person is unfair. Why?

It is time to say good-bye to the death penalty. Most politicians are afraid to denounce it, even though they know the truth, for fear they will lose their conservative voter base. And most Justices except for John Paul Stevens, who unfortunately will not be on the United States Supreme Court much longer, are totally out of synch with reality and the evolving standards of fairness of our society.

Justice in the Gardner case?— well, probably, because he will have to spend his life in a place where he cannot harm anyone else in society. I commend the families of Chelsea and Amber for realizing the reality of the death penalty and that Mr. Gardner will pay for his crimes more by having to think about them for the rest of his life from a small jail cell. Justice for anyone who is given a death sentence? Well, maybe this is justice in China, Iran, or Russia, but not in the United States!

After reading my blog, please educate your friends, neighbors, and yourself on these important topics. More laws are not the answer, and the death penalty, in the words of San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis, is indeed a “hollow promise.”

Attorney Wins Major Medical Marijuana Appeal in San Diego !

Friday, December 25th, 2009

On November 17, 2009 the Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division One in San Diego released its decision in the case of   People v.  Nathan Archer (D052978) invalidating his conviction for the personal possession of marijuana.  Attorney Russell S. Babcock represents Mr. Archer and argued before the Court of Appeal.  The opinion was authored by Justice Patricia Benke

In the decision, the Court of Appeal agreed with Mr. Babcock’s arguments and the concession by the Attorney General that the part of the Medical Marijuana Law that imposes a limit on the number of plants  or quantity of marijuana that can be possessed by a medical marijuana patient is unconstitutional.  The California legislature attempted to set a limit of six manture plants and twelve plants in total that can be possessed by a medical marijuana patient.  The language that was approved by the California voters did not contain such limitations.  And at trial, Mr. Archer submitted evidence that often individuals who have various medical conditions require the use of larger quantities of marijuana.

This decision is important because what it means is that the jury should not be instructed that a person is guility of possession of marijuana merely becuase they possessed a certain quantity of the medicine or a certain number of plants.  The question of whether the marijauana is possessed for medical purposes is a question that should be left entirely for the jury.

The irony in this case is that the San Diego probation department has attempted to have Mr. Archer register as a narcotics offender even though it is universally agreed that marijuana is not a narcotic and that Nathan Archer is a valid medical marijuana patient.  Unforutnately, the court upheld his conviction for cultivation of marijuana for distribution finding that the error in instructing the jury on the mandatory limit of plants as to this charge was "harmless".  Mr. Archer and I strongly disagree and have petitioned the California Supreme Court for relief.  The California Supreme court already has a case before it , People v. Kelly, which is very similiar to Mr. Archer’s case, and a decision on Kelly is expected soon.

The District Attorney and the police expect that citizens will follow the law.  Now, they are the law breakers by continuing to harass the owners of legitimate medicial marijuana clinics and even arresting them and charging them.  They have failed to follow the policy of Barack Obama and the White House that legitimate medical marijuana patients and their providers should not be prosecuted even though federal law still remains in conflict with state law.

Shame on San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis for not following the law she is supposed to follow as District Attorney !  I  urge all of you to contact your state legislators and the office of San Diego District Attorney Dumanis and tell her that you want her to follow the law that was passed by the voters and to stop wasting precious California taxpayer money by prosecuting marijuana related cases.  Also, if you feel strongly enough about this issue, you can support an organization fighting for the rights of medical marijuana patients such as California NORML. (National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws.) 

At the Law Office of Russell Babcock , we will continue to fight for individuals, like Mr. Archer, who are not criminals, but patients,  and who are following the law, unlike the District Attorney.  If you are charged with a marijuana related crime, contact an attorney immediately.  It is quite possible that the charges can be dismissed or reduced depending on the circumstances. 

Become a U.S citizen quickly!!

Tuesday, December 1st, 2009

I urge everyone who is a permanent resident of this country and eligible for citizenship to apply as soon as possible. Residents who marry American citizens may become eligible as early as three years after establishing residency.

Many of my clients are permanent residents, many for more than twenty years. What they often don’t realize is that permanent residency is anything but permanent. Almost any minor criminal offense can serve as the basis for deportation.

I remember Jackie, who was twenty one years old, and had a husband who was a U.S. citizen and three U.S. citizen children. After a minor drug charge, she was deported to Mexico and she didn’t have any family there and she didn’t even speak Spanish !!!

And then there was Aracely. Her boyfriend had marijuana in the vehicle and she didn’t know it was there. When the two were arrested, the police offered to drop all charges against her in exchange for her forfeiting her green card !

It is more expensive than before to become a United States citizen, but it is still the best $600 or so that a permanent resident can spend.Don’t take the chance; apply for U.S. citizenship as soon as possible from the form on the USCIS website or hire a competent immigration attorney.


For Criminal Defense Attorney and Lawyer Representation in the San Diego California area, call 619.531.0887 for your free consultation.

Get an Experienced Criminal Defense Lawyer on Your Side:

Russell S. Babcock is a talented criminal defense attorney with over 30 years experience who offers personalized service and proven results. Russell S. Babcock  was nominated “Criminal Defense Attorney of the Year” and can provide you with the criminal law services you need to protect your rights.

Contact Us for a Free Consultation:

Call us today at (619) 531-0887 or use the form on the top-right edge of this page for your free consultation and we’ll offer you expert help and answer any specific questions you have about your case. Protect your rights today and call the law offices of Russell S. Babcock about our Criminal Defense Attorney and Lawyer Services available in the San Diego, California area.

© 2010 Russell S. Babcock - Bilingual San Diego Criminal Defense Attorney & Lawyer
Website SEO and Internet marketing by Internet Marketing Company. Wordpress Development by San Diego Web development company PROS Inc