Our District Attorney Needs to Intake his cases to make sure Veterans & or Servicepersons eligible for Penal Code 1170.9 diversion are advised of that potential benefit at the earliest time in the proceedings

Section 1170.9 of the state California Penal Code comes into play when the defendant claims that “he or she committed the offense as a result of sexual trauma, traumatic brain injury, post-traumatic stress disorder, substance abuse, or mental health problems stemming from service in the United States military.”
.

If a vet or serviceperson makes that claim, the court must hold a hearing, and the judge must determine the answers to a number of questions: Is the person (or was he/she) a member of the U. S. military? Does the defendant suffer from sexual trauma, traumatic brain injury, PTSD, substance abuse, or mental health problems as a result of his/her service? Is there a treatment program that’s appropriate for him/her? Is the serviceperson or vet eligible for probation?
.
If the answer to all of these questions is yes, the judge has the authority to place the vet and or serviceperson on probation, and to order him/her into an appropriate treatment program for a period no longer than what would have been served in state prison or county jail.
.
If the serviceperson and or vet do well in the treatment program and comply with the conditions of their probation, the vet and or serviceperson can request a follow-up hearing. Effective January 1, 2013, the judge at this hearing will have the authority to end the probation before its scheduled expiration date, and to cancel any fines, fees, and assessments stemming from the conviction (except for court-ordered victim restitution). In many cases, the judge will also have the authority to reduce a felony to a misdemeanor, and to order expungement of the record of your offense.

.
Questions: Who is going to tell that vet or serviceperson about their potential diversion options if he or she don't know about it (and his his lawyer doesn't)? (2) Since knowing about such options would be crucial for there to be informed consent in the plea bargaining process, why isn't the DA's office asking the threshold questions to honor the sacrifice of our vets and servicepersons??

On the prosecutorial duty to disclose information--is it right to unethically withhold information even though technically permissible under case law??

American Bar Association's Rule 3.8(d) is more demanding than the constitutional case law in that it requires the disclosure of evidence or information favorable to the defense without regard to the anticipated impact of the evidence or information on a trial's outcome.  ABA Rule 3.8(d) requires prosecutors to disclose favorable evidence so that the defense can decide on its utility. The ethical duty of disclosure is not limited to just admissible 'evidence' [but] it also disclosure of favorable 'information'. Though possibly inadmissible itself, favorable information may lead a defendant's lawyer to admissible testimony or other evidence or assist him [sic] in other ways, such as in plea negotiations.For the disclosure to be timely, it must be made early enough that the information can be used effectively. . . . Once known to the prosecutor, [evidence and information] must be disclosed under Rule 3.8(d) as soon as reasonably practical.  Among the most significant purposes for which disclosure must be made under Rule 3.8(d) is to enable defense counsel to advise the defendant regarding whether to plead guilty. 

Attorney General Eric Holder recently threw out the corruption case against Alaska Senator Ted Stevens because Holder concluded that DOJ lawyers violated their obligation to disclose information to the defense.

We need to make sure the notch-on-the-gun hunger some prosecutors embrace for visibility, promotion and/or re-electability is not satiated by unethical non-disclosure.

Full Text of Rule 3.8 @ http://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_3_8_special_responsibilities_of_a_prosecutor.html

DA RACE for 2014 is ..............

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
.

Inspired in part by the "Kumbayah" Kamala Harris & Mike Ramos fund raiser yesterday [and by the utter failure of Mikes Ramos over his past two terms to even get to trial the Charter School & Colonies case, the sentencing favoritism for "Friends of Mike Ramos" & the continuing abuse of the DA's office's charging authority to target people based on their ethnicity, incomes and politics, Bob Conaway decided to join the race for the top cop spot.
.

Ramos has allowed environmental and civil rights crimes to be committed in our communities, and those committing those crimes to act with impunity. Mike Ramos shows a resistance to the spirit of change and reform required by AB 109 (the Realignment Legislation). It makes no sense to talk about drug seizures and the community impact from drugs on the street while ignoring the poisoning of our air and water by corporate America, the illegal foreclosure of homes by financial institutions and code enforcement harassment of small businesses. It makes no sense to make people of color serve time in county jails for offenses while "Friends of Mike Ramos" pay fines or are allowed to walk.  How Mike Ramos let Mitzelfelt get away with his false statements on campaign statements (hiding some of his developer money sources), current Supervisor James Ramos' failure to report timely and under penalty of perjury six figure contributions to his college board campaign and how Kamala Harris did not prosecute Mike Ramos for misleading (and therefore false) statements of his 700 forms are all examples of taking people off the prosecutorial target range for political reasons.

.

In the last election cycle Bob, the endorsed democrat came within 4% of forcing a runoff with Ramos despite being outspent over 25+ to 1 so money and glitcy fund raisers notwithstanding, this may be, the Good Lord willing and assuming Ramos does not trump up some charges against me or my clients, a race for the books.
.

Bob Conaway

SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY DOES NOT HAVE A COMMUNITY RELATIONS or CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSION [nor the District Attorney a Civil Rights Law Enforcement Program]--WHY??

A glance at the San Bernardino County website in an attempt to see if there is a structure that gives people a place to grieve about civil rights violations or to discuss government policies concerning same [http://www.sbcounty.gov/cob/main/OtherServices-bcc-BoardRoster.aspx] revealed that the County does not advertise the existence of a Community Relations, Human Relations or a Civil Rights Commission.
.
At the San Bernardino District Attorney's office's website [http://www.sbcountyda.org/]  the categories under the "Action Center" include:

Marsy's Law
High Profile Cases
Apply for Victim Compensation
Inmate Locator
Find Case Information
Report a Crime
Report Workers' Comp Violation
Report Real Estate Fraud
Report Welfare Fraud
Report Auto Fraud
Report Identity Theft
My Day in Court

Victims of discriminatory abuses by private (and public officials) are marginalized by the focus AWAY from civil rights (so how can that be tolerated?) The Unruh Civil Rights Act found at California Civil Code 51 et seq, specifically contemplates enforcement action by District Attorneys (like Mike Ramos)---so the mandate of the law is not even a thought in the process with the current DA Mike Ramos?? Sad. Another reason for a change in the Board of Supervisor's leadership, the Sheriff and the District Attorney?

.

As a candidate for the District Attorney's top spot, I would form a civil rights unit in the DA's office, staff it and work with community groups and any commissions established by the County to hear grievances and complaints, with an eye to making the DA's office a part of the team the law contemplates as players in the effort to enforce our civil rights laws.

.

Sincerely,

.

Bob Conaway

MIKE RAMOS for DA IF YOU DON'T EVER WANT TO SEE A PAPER INTENSIVE CASE GET TO TRIAL

The San Bernardino Sun reports what we already know from the Colonies case & the Charter School case -- cases with a lot of paper & witnesses to marshall are not cases that will end up getting tried to verdict any time soon, especially with well funded private counsel fighting back.  I guess one way to look at it is that it keeps a campaign issue alive (fodder for the I will "continue the fight against corruption"). The latest chapter in Mike Ramos is the POST [Peace Officer Standards Training] scandal cases. See excellent Sun article at:http://www.sbsun.com/general-news/20131106/two-years-after-indictments-sb-county-sheriffs-post-corruption-case-fizzles#.UntI2Rc_5rg.email. First, my read is that there are many talented people not getting the promotions and support they need. Second, on specifically the POST scandal, why wasn't the employee association (SEBA) involved to ferret out what was a lax policy problem vs what was poor management and or oversight vs what was actual criminal conduct. I can't believe this mess.