My Blog About Cyber Laws

Being arrested is no picnic. It is an ordeal for the arrestee as well as the friends and family of the arrestee. After the arrest, a bail hearing takes place in front of a judge to set the amount of the bail. The judge will take into consideration several factors, including how severe the crime, any previous convictions, and if the arrestee has steady employment. Once bail has been set, a friend or family member will have to decide to pay the full bail amount themselves or secure the services of a bail bondsman to get the person out of jail.

Bail bondsmen make their living off the fee they can charge for posting a defendant's bail. Usually the fee is a percentage of the total bail. Here are 5 tips for surviving the bail bonding process:

1. Research a reputable, professional and long standing bail bonding company. You will be dealing with the bonding agent until the case is settled making this an important decision. The Internet is a great place to search for some well-recommended options. Once you have found a few call each one and ask them questions. Select the agent that you are the most comfortable working with. Make sure you have available: full name of the person in jail, what jail they are in, the arrestee's booking number, the charges, and any other relevant information.

2. Determine the appropriate terms for the bail agreement. The bail agent will usually meet you at the jail to post the bond. If you are not in the same city as the arrestee the paperwork and payments can be handled electronically or over the phone. A nonrefundable fee (generally a percentage of the of the total bail amount) is then paid and in some cases collateral or a cosigner in case the arrestee decides to jump bail by not showing up in court.

3. Getting the arrestee out of jail. The bondsman will notify the court that he has an agreement on the behalf of the arrestee. The bail agent posts the bond after the fee has been paid and any collateral has been signed over. The bondsman or the court clerk will hand the arrestee an official notification that the bail has been paid, the arrestee shows the slip to the judge, and they are released on bail.

4. What happens after being released from jail? The arrestee must show up for all court proceedings and meet any conditions set by the bail agent. The defendant will have to comply with all their legal requirements or they will be in violation of their bail and be forced to pay the full bail amount and sit in jail until their court date.

5. What are the consequences of not following the requirements of the bail? If the arrestee fails to appear in court, the bail agent is required to pay the full bail amount. The bail agent locates the defendant and takes them back to jail. If the arrestee fails to appear for the court date any collateral signed over with the bond could be lost.

For more information please visit our website http://www.leessummitmobailbonds.com.

Article Source:http://EzineArticles.com/?expert

View the Original article

The debate on gun control includes many issues such as whether restrictions are permissible under the Constitution, and whether gun control laws actually help to control crime. State laws restricting firearms vary and are independent of federal firearms laws, which are surprisingly few compared to the estimated 300 major state gun laws. In addition, it has been widely estimated that the number of local gun laws could be as high as 20,000.

A list of the major Federal Law restricting gun control in the U.S. is strikingly short:

• 1934 - National Firearms Act was a response to prohibition and the rise of gangsters, with the goal of curbing the use of automatic-fire weapons.

• 1938 - Federal Firearms Act regulated and monitored the selling and shipping of firearms through both interstate and foreign commerce channels.

• 1968 - Gun Control Act implemented license requirements and regulation, as well as restricting the sale of firearms to convicted felons, the mentally incompetent, and drug users. The Act also outlawed mail order sales of rifles and shotguns.

• 1986 - Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act banned the sale of armor piercing ammunition that was capable of penetrating bullet proof clothing.

• 1990 - Crime Control Act created criminal penalties for possessing firearms within school zones; and restricted the assembly of illegal semiautomatic rifles and shotguns.

• 1994 - Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act enacted stricter rules for background checks.

• 1994 - Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act banned assault weapons and enhanced laws for the possession of guns by juveniles.

• 1999 - Gun Bill is passed that requires all new hand guns to have a trigger lock.

Proponents of gun control argue that stronger Federal laws are necessary to restrict firearms because state laws cannot curb the flow of guns from less restrictive states to more restrictive states. These advocates seek to ban specific firearms that are believed to be primarily used for criminal purposes or pose unusually high risks to the public. They also seek stricter regulations and restrictions on who may possess a firearm. Unfortunately, the actual impact of gun laws on crime is difficult to determine because there simply is not enough comprehensive, current, or accurate data to definitively assess whether there is a causal connection between guns and violence.

Various organizations collect data from the FBI and U.S. Census Bureau to provide some insight into the correlation between firearms and violence in the U.S. Four studies provide the following statistics:

1. In 2010, there were 14,748 murders reported by the FBI, and 9, 958 of those crimes involved a firearm;

2. There were 31,347 gun-related fatalities which include homicides, legal intervention, suicides, and accidents, in 2009;

3. Approximately 4.3 million victims reported non-lethal crimes including rape or sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault in 2009. An estimated 22% of those crimes involved the use of weapons; and 8% of weapons used were firearms; and

4. In the five year period beginning in 1987, approximately 62,200 victims of violent crimes (1% of all violent crimes) used a gun to defend themselves. An additional 20,000 per year used a gun to protect property. These figures may also include persons who work as police officers and armed security guards.

Opponents of gun laws cite recent U.S. Supreme Court cases that hold the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects an individual's right to possess a firearm for lawful purposes, such as self-defense, within the home and in federal enclaves. The Court has also affirmed lower court decisions that determined handguns are "arms" for the purposes of the Second Amendment. Critics of these decisions argue that the Constitution does not contain an express right of an individual to use firearms for personal self-defense, and that an individual's need to protect themselves with weapons has been greatly diminished in modern society.

California Criminal Law Specialist Doreen B. Boxer, Esq., protects individuals and companies charged with - or under investigation for - criminal offenses. If your life, liberty or reputation are at stake, you need Boxer in your corner. http://orangecounty-criminaldefenselawyer.com

(c) Copyright - Doreen B. Boxer. All Rights Reserved Worldwide.

Article Source:http://EzineArticles.com/?expert

View the Original article

In 1991, Harmelin v. Michigan, the United States Supreme Court held that a sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for a serious felony is constitutional under the Eighth Amendment. During the case, the Supreme Court members heavily debated whether or to what extent the Eighth Amendment requires proportionality. Some justices argued that the Eighth Amendment has no proportionality requirement for the length of prison sentences, while others believed that it had some degree of proportionality.

The Eighth Amendment clearly states that "excessive fines" are prohibited. That implies that the Eighth Amendment requires a degree of proportionality between the nature of the crime and the fine issued. However, the Eighth Amendment allows says that "cruel and unusual punishments" may not be inflicted. The Amendment never states whether it is cruel and unusual to punish a less culpable class of persons, innocent people, or people who commit certain types of crimes. It simply states that the punishment cannot be "cruel and unusual." Setting someone on fire as punishment is clearly both cruel and unusual. This punishment hasn't been used in the United States in a long time and it is known to inflict a large amount of pain and suffering. Executing children can also be viewed as cruel and unusual since children are less developed than adults and children are not frequently executed. We often punish juveniles differently from the way we punish adults. However, there does not seem to be a clear proportionality argument stemming from the Eighth Amendment. The Eighth Amendment seems to provide more of a maximum allowed punishment for a particular class of people.

In pre-colonial England, many crimes were punishable by death or other severe punishments. States have previously introduced the death penalty for non-homicide crimes such as rape. Treason can also be punishable by death even if no deaths results from it.

In my opinion, the Eighth Amendment would prohibit the punishment of people who have not committed a crime or had no requisite state of mind to commit a crime. In addition, I believe that the Eighth Amendment limits the punishment toward certain groups of people such as the mentally ill and juveniles. However, I think that pure proportionality should stem from the Fourteenth Amendment.

In 1996, in BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore, the United States Supreme Court relied on the Fourteenth Amendment and held that excessive punitive damage awards violate substantive due process. Likewise, the proportionality of the crime to the punishment should be examined under the Due Process clause. There are many goals to punishment and varying views on the harm of crimes to society so proportionality is subjective.

To solve this problem, I would recommend dividing crimes into categories: petty crimes punishable by a maximum of six months imprisonment, crimes punishable by a minimum of six months imprisonment and a maximum of life imprisonment, crimes punishable by mandatory life imprisonment, and crimes punishable by death. Each crime would have to be proportional to such category. Otherwise, it would violate substantive due process. Factors to evaluate in each crime may be: (1) the degree of reprehensibility of the defendant's conduct; (2) the amount of harm the defendant caused to both the victim and society; and (3) the reversibility of the harm particularly through the defendant's future actions such as restitution to the victim(s).

In other words, the punishment has to be "grossly disproportional" to the crime committed. Creating more categories has no legal basis and should be left to democratically elected legislatures to decide. Under this reasoning, the ban on "excessive fines" also stems not only from the Eighth Amendment also from the Due Process Clause.

The Eighth Amendment and Due Process Clause work together. For example, the Eighth Amendment may not forbid requiring someone to wear a shirt saying "I steal mail" as punishment for stealing his neighbor's mail. However, requiring someone to wear that shirt every day for his whole life may violate substantive due process.

Anton Lebedev writes about legal issues including constitutional legal issues. Anton Lebedev also markets law firms including the Law Offices of C. Melody Edwardo, PLLC, a Raleigh NC law firm.

Article Source:http://EzineArticles.com/?expert

View the Original article

In California, the state's new realignment plan is starting to affect the dynamics inside of the county jails. According to Orange County officials, the jails are becoming more dangerous because of an increasing number of seasoned and more violent inmates being housed there instead of state prisons.

The realignment plan is an attempt to reduce the overcrowded conditions of California prisons by shifting more inmates to local jails. While the inmates who are being sent to county lockup to serve sentences are classified as non-violent offenders, this does not mean they abstain from acting violently inside the jail.

Previously, inmates housed in the Orange County jails were awaiting trial or sentencing or were serving a sentence of less than a year for less-serious offenses. Now, many inmates are serving sentences of up to three years or parole violators who are sent back to jail.

Many of the inmates going into county lockups for extended periods of time have been in the system a long time and spent some time inside state prisons. As a result, there has been a surge in violence inside Orange County jails.

Reports show that from January 1 to July 26, 2012, there have been 277 inmate assaults. A huge increase over 2011, which saw only 272 assaults for the entire year. There were also 16 attacks on members of the jail staff during that time period. Last year, there were only 18 attacks total.

Hoarding of contraband is also on the rise inside Orange County jails. Because inmates are staying longer, they are starting to settle in, much in the same way state prisoners do when they know they will be living in one space for a long period. Most contraband, including drugs, is brought in through the mail. This is leading many to consider switching to an email-only system instead of allowing mail to be sent to the jail.

Jails must also spend more time on solving the housing puzzle as each new inmate comes in. The staff must know an inmate's criminal history and background in order to know how much of a risk they pose to other inmates. This is decided by factors such as gang affiliation or violence. Knowing who needs to be kept away from the general population is a key part in maintaining safety inside the jail.

It has also been found that some inmates are trying to assert their dominance inside the jails by forming gangs and trying to "tax" other inmates. To stem off this type of control, the staff must find a place to transfer the inmates to break up these gangs.

For Orange County, there is concern that they will soon be facing their own overcrowding problem inside the jails. It is expected that by October 2012, all three of the jails will be at capacity. Right now, the inmate population is approximately 6,600, with less than 200 beds available for incoming inmates.

Tonya Page Bail Bonds is a professional bail bond company serving Orange County California. Tonya Page works alongside her husband, Greg, of Greg Rynerson Bail Bonds. Together, they are a successful, family owned and operated business, and are expert bondsmen and licensed professionals with over 35 years of experience. They understand and want to help families that are in an urgent time of need. Contact them today for confidential California bail bonds assistance.

Article Source:http://EzineArticles.com/?expert

View the Original article