Non-Disclosing Old DWI Convictions: How to Take Advantage of the New Legislative Change

May 18, 2018

By Criminal Defense Lawyer Jeremy Rosenthal

jeremy@texasdefensefirm.com

(972) 369-0577

Until recently the only way to hide a Driving While Intoxicated Arrest from the Public was to win your case or have it dismissed.  Often a tall order.

The Texas Legislature passed & the Governor signed a law in 2017 allowing non-disclosures for DWI cases where the person qualifies after a DWI conviction.  A non-disclosure hides the arrest and court records from the public.  It can still be viewed by many public entities and it shouldn’t be confused with an expunction which is a complete destruction of the arrest records.  But its still pretty good.

Remember you have to file additional documents to expunge or non-disclose records.

There is a big debate amongst lawyers whether this provision is retroactive — that is whether you can clear something which happened prior to September 1, 2017.  Early returns suggest you can.

Here’s how you qualify to non-disclose a DWI:

  • First time offense
  • No car accident in the arrest
  • Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC) below 0.15
  • Get probation for your DWI
  • Have Interlock Ignition Device on your car for 6 Months of your probation.
  • Wait 2-years from the date your probation ends

The provision was like lightning from a clear-blue sky.  As you can imagine, DWI arrestees have been a punching bag for politicians in Texas for the past 40 years.  Interestingly, there is no requirement you plead guilty — which means you could take your case to trial and if you lose — still qualify for the non-disclosure.  It would give a DWI arrestee two bites at the apple so to speak.

Last two things — (1) if you’ve been charged with DWI in Texas, make sure the record is clear at your plea (or sentencing after trial) that you meet all of these requirements to make it easier down the road.  (2) If you’ve got a DWI from 2017 or before, check to see if you qualify.

*Jeremy Rosenthal is Board Certified in Criminal Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and licensed by the Supreme Court of Texas.  www.texasdefensefirm.com

 

 

Leave a Comment » | Civil Liberties, Collateral Consequences of a Criminal Record, DWI, Expunction & Non-Disclosure | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by Jeremy Rosenthal, Esq.

Top 5 Most Common Police Attitudes – #1

May 15, 2018

By Criminal Defense Lawyer Jeremy Rosenthal

texasdefensefirm.com

(972) 369-0577

This week I’m counting down some of the top police attitudes I see as a criminal defense lawyer in cases I handle.  Again, these are in no particular order of frequency or importance.

One theme I’ve discussed several times in this series of blogs is how the pressures of law enforcement can pull, push, stretch and bend officers in every different direction.  Police see the ugly underbelly of humanity and it shapes how they view the world.

Today’s attitude is no different.

#1 — Scumbag Mode

Police are at their most disappointing when they are in what I call “scumbag mode.”  It is self explanatory.  They think they’re dealing with a scumbag and they treat the person as such.

What I don’t always see with an officer in scumbag mode is an officer who is downright aggressive.  Instead, many are passive aggressive allowing the suspect to think they are in control.  What the suspect doesn’t know is they are already trapped in a spider’s web.

But we can tell they are in scumbag mode because of how they act or what they say.  Evidence of innocence gets crumpled up and pitched right into the trash can.  They call tow trucks once they go back to their squad cars.  They game plan with other officers about the arrest… then they go right back out to the defendant and pretend he or she can talk their way out of trouble.

Not happening.

The hardest things to get juries to understand about when an officer goes into this mode are three things — first is the degree of often passive-aggressive manipulation; second is their bias causes them to distort evidence against the accused; and finally — jurors don’t want to believe police are manipulative or that they’re not objective.

Now, in fairness… police think this way probably as a survival mechanism.  They see the underbelly of humanity and much of the time — their instinct and hunches are right about dealing with a scumbag more often than they are wrong.

What happens when the police go into “scumbag” mode and they’re not dealing with a scumbag?  They arrest people doing nothing wrong in Starbucks.  What is more likely than a national scandal is police hassling a young person, a non-conformist, or as all too often is the case, a minority for much longer than they’d deal with a soccer-mom from the suburbs.

Next time you see a story about police hassling someone for far too long remember they’re doing it because of their job pressures and because they’ve been triggered to go into their “scumbag” mode.

*Jeremy Rosenthal is Board Certified in Criminal Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and licensed by the Supreme Court of Texas.

 

Leave a Comment » | Civil Liberties, DWI, Grand Jury, Police, Uncategorized | Permalink
Posted by Jeremy Rosenthal, Esq.

The 5 Most Common Police Attitudes – #4

May 12, 2018

By Criminal Defense Lawyer Jeremy Rosenthal

texasdefensefirm.com

(972) 369-0577

Today, I’m continuing my series on the 5 most common police attitudes which I see case in and case out in the many, many cases I handle as a criminal defense lawyer.  As noted before, these opinions are due to my amateur police psychology.

#4 — Undecided

Police get complaints all day every day about wrongdoing.  They also see things while they are on duty which arouse their suspicion or curiosity.

It goes without saying often times when they approach a particular problem they are undecided about the outcome going into their work.  Normally, the longer a police officer is undecided in their investigation the more objective they will be.

Being undecided about an outcome is an extremely healthy attitude for someone making big decisions about another person’s life.  It causes the officer to investigate in detail and in doing so — to test alternate hypotheses, to review both favorable and unfavorable evidence in a balanced approach, and to understand the weight of their decision.  Obviously at some point an officer is likely to move off the undecided bubble one way or the other with the more information they assess and gather.  What is important is when they are undecided — they are better able to view the evidence neutrally.

I often see police who are extremely conscientious and do their very best to make the important decisions they are charged with making.  An officer should be undecided entering into every investigation undertaken.

But the equation breaks down a bit from here.  Police would have you believe they are undecided when approaching or investigating a case 100% of the time.  My experience is it is more like 20% of the time.

In fairness to police — I usually won’t see cases they don’t file unless I’m brought into the case very early.  The 20% could easily be much higher because I don’t know how many cases are put right in their trash-cans.

What I can say is by my best guestimation of the cases I do see — probably about 80% of the time the officer has a particular preferred outcome going into their investigation of cases they do ultimately file.  This can apply to DWI arrests, sexual assaults, or even white-collar embezzlement schemes.

Police are human too.

*Jeremy Rosenthal is Board Certified in Criminal Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and licensed by the Supreme Court of Texas.

 

Leave a Comment » | Computer Crimes, crimes against children, Divorce related crimes, DWI, Emergency Protective Orders, General Q&A, Police, Police and Prosecutors, sex cases, Uncategorized | Permalink
Posted by Jeremy Rosenthal, Esq.

Are Police Going through an Investigation or Just the Arrest Process?

March 12, 2018

By Collin County Criminal Defense Lawyer Jeremy Rosenthal

texasdefensefirm.com

(972) 369-0577

The dictionary defines “investigate” as, “To carry out a systematic or formal inquiry to discover and examine the facts of (an incident, allegation, etc.) so as to establish the truth.”

Truth, then, is the focus of an investigation.

But virtually always we see the focus of an investigation is a person — not necessarily the truth.  The assumption made by law enforcement is the person who is the focus of the investigation and the truth are one and the same thing.  In other words, many, many “investigations” are flawed from the start.  The result of the investigation is only correct where the assumption is also correct.

And it is further true when you ASSUME you make an ASS of U and ME.

I can’t tell you how many times I’ve seen an “investigation” start with a detective or police officer reaching their conclusion first.  They call a tow truck to haul off someone’s car for DWI before they even ask the driver out of the car.  They offer a complaining witness victim assistance information, sympathy, and promises of action after just moments of hearing one side.  They promise action to someone who lost their savings when they come in blaming someone else for their loss.

Wouldn’t it be more appropriate to call those police actions “the arrest process?” instead of an investigation?  It is often clear the police aren’t interested in the truth — instead they are interested in arresting the person they think is guilty from the outset.  They just know in their heart the truth without researching any of the facts.  What could go wrong doing it that way?

The arrest process looks more like a geometric proof than a search for the truth.  The police are checking to see if there is enough evidence for each and every element and if there is — then bang — case closed and the bad guy is handcuffed.  The problems is many of the facts are rose-colored to the investigator and the standard for probable cause is low.  Instead of putting pieces of a puzzle neatly together, the oddly-shaped pieces are jammed together to make the image already in the officer’s head.

The arrest process might be just fine in certain instances.  I’m sure it often yields fair results. But let’s just not call them what they’re not — investigations focused on the truth.

*Jeremy Rosenthal is Board Certified in Criminal Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and licensed by the Supreme Court of Texas. Nothing in this article is intended to be legal advice.  For legal advice about this or any topic you should consult an attorney directly.

 

1 Comment | Assault, Computer Crimes, crimes against children, Divorce related crimes, DWI, Murder, Police, Police and Prosecutors, sex cases, White Collar Crime | Permalink
Posted by Jeremy Rosenthal, Esq.

Aggressive Criminal Defense Lawyer

March 6, 2018

By Criminal Defense Lawyer Jeremy Rosenthal

texasdefensefirm.com

(972) 369-0577

My name is Jeremy Rosenthal.  I eat nails.  I crawl on broken glass.  When I’m not screaming at prosecutors or judges for my clients, I’m having a 30 Lb. medicine ball slammed into my abdomen like Rocky Balboa training to take on the planet.

Not really.

I suspect all lawyers – let alone defense lawyers – are regularly asked by prospective clients if they are “aggressive,” “tough,” or if they are “a fighter?”

Truthfully, I’m not the best person to answer the question.  I’d say go ask some prosecutors how fun I am in trial.  I’ve been at this long enough to be pretty sure I’m not the path of least resistance for them — but again — this is for them to answer.

I’d like to make two points in this blog.  The first is the question itself assumes being aggressive is the right approach in any given case.  Second, is being an aggressive, tough fighter isn’t mutually exclusive with other skills which make an excellent lawyer.

It would be interesting to be asked if I was “thorough,” “meticulous,” and “calculated…”  Just once I’d like to be asked if I was “sensitive,” “encouraging,” and “thoughtful.”  Maybe today someone will try to see if I am “charismatic,” “clever,” and “crafty.”

It takes all these skills — and more — on many cases.  There is a right time to turn up the aggressiveness and toughness.  There is a right time to be calculated,  a right time to be sensitive, and a right time to be charismatic (to the extent I can turn that one on and off).

Ultimately a person needs to choose a lawyer which makes them feel comfortable.

But your lawyer needs to have a complete game.  They need to be a Swiss Army Knife of skills because each case is it’s own snowflake.  There are cases where I’ve made courthouse enemies for decades and there are cases where we need to pay attention to the carpenter’s rule – measure twice and cut once.  Sometimes both are appropriate given the case.

*Jeremy Rosenthal is Board Certified in Criminal Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and licensed by the Supreme Court of Texas.

 

 

Leave a Comment » | Assault, Computer Crimes, DWI, General Q&A, Murder, sex cases, Trial Advocacy, Uncategorized | Permalink
Posted by Jeremy Rosenthal, Esq.

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »