Dallas Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

Rick Steves is my favorite travel author. If you are going to Europe his books are the go to resource. His travel show on PBS is also a great watch even if you aren't going to Europe. What is less well known about Rick are his progressive, reasonable, and compassionate views on Marijuana. Rick and I are both members of NORML- the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws.

Here is a letter Rick sent out to the membership today. Compare his views with the taxpayer funded cannabis propoganda on ONDCP.

TV Host Rick Steves: NORML, Good Citizenship and You!
December 31, 2007

Hello NORML Supporters!

I’ve found a great niche in life. I love to travel and I love to teach travel. Travel carbonates my life. When we travel, we find new wonders and new ways of looking at things. And travel is a great teacher. By traveling, I’ve learned that the costly prohibition against marijuana is a uniquely American crusade. In Europe these days, a joint is about as exciting as a can of beer.

As author of thirty best-selling travel guidebooks and host of the popular TV series, Rick Steves’ Europe, I’m a public person. I pride myself on being honest; open to other viewpoints, and caring. These are all reasons why I speak out publicly against the counter-productive and wrong-minded US prohibition against marijuana.

It’s striking to me that here in America, a nation which has championed freedom since even before the French Revolution, 40,000,000 citizens smoke pot recreationally yet so few will admit it publicly. People call my outspokenness on pot courageous.

If it takes courage to speak the truth, then it is even more important to do so.
For the better part of the past five years, I’ve served proudly on the Advisory Board of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) – America’s leading drug law reform group.

During my NORML tenure, I’ve said loud and clear that I believe responsible adult use of marijuana is a civil liberty; that the current prohibition against pot is as counter- productive and costly to our society today as the prohibition against alcohol was back in the 1920s and 30s. I’ve said that if the goal of our nation’s drug policy is harm reduction (rather than locking people up), problem cannabis use should be treated as a health problem rather than a criminal problem. (That’s the pragmatic European approach.) Further more, I believe that if our government managed to lock up every pot smoker in the USA, our country would instantly become a much less interesting place to call home.

I’ve enjoyed sharing these ideas during my keynote speeches at national NORML Conferences and I shared my thoughts on drug policy reform in a recent Los Angeles Times editorial. In fact, in my lectures all over the USA, I share frankly and openly how America’s “War on Drugs” is failing while Europe’s more pragmatic approach is much more effective.

In America you can be hard on drugs or soft on drugs. Europe offers a third choice—smart on drugs.

Many of my friends and workmates are concerned that my speaking out against America’s failed pot policies is dangerous. But you don’t need to smoke pot to oppose a law that criminalizes it. As an American, I insist on the freedom to oppose a law I think is wrong. As a businessman, I’ve found no real backlash. As a parent, I have credibility with my children on drug abuse issues.

I’ve explained my beliefs on countless radio and TV interviews. Invariably, those interviewing me express admiration for my common-sense stance—but only after the mic is turned off. (Candor would threaten their jobs.) My political representatives understand and respect my viewpoint – even if they are afraid to make it an issue in today’s political environment. And personally, I am embracing one less lie than most of my countrymen. That’s a good thing. It just feels right to speak publicly about the wrongness of making the responsible adult use of marijuana a crime.

When it comes to smoking pot, the only shame I feel is how our nation treats its citizenry.
I feel shame when I read that 80,000 Americans are in jail today on marijuana charges. I feel shame that the US arrests over 800,000 Americans a year for marijuana—90 percent for simple possession. I feel shame when I listen to America's Drug Czar parrot administration lies about the effects of pot so that our government can continue to deny its therapeutic use for seriously ill patients who so vitally need it. I feel shame when I learn about the billions of taxpayers’ dollars our government spends targeting and jailing non-violent marijuana smokers, while at the same time it denies needed funding for necessary social programs such as health care, education, and treatment for victims of hard drug abuse. And I feel frustrated here in “the land of the free and the home of the brave” that I am one of just 3 or 4 paltry (no offense, boys) celebrities with the nerve to admit publicly that they smoke pot.

I believe the mature adult recreational use of marijuana is a civil liberty
Our responsible, adult, pot-smoking friends and workmates should not be criminals. That’s a big reason why I’ve chosen to devote my time, energy, and financial resources to supporting NORML’s tireless efforts. Today I’m asking you do the same.

Together, supporting groups like NORML, we are making substantial progress toward ending the prohibition of our age. Over 4 million Americans are tuning into NORML’s daily podcast and more than 375,000 people have recently signed up to support NORML on the social networking website Facebook. However, these totals still represent only a fraction of the tens of millions of Americans who – like me – understand that marijuana is best treated as a soft drug—taxed and regulated like alcohol and tobacco.

NORML is not a charity…it’s a service, fighting our battle in Washington, DC.
If you agree with me, support NORML financially with an end-of-the-year gift. If you’re reading this letter you’ve given money to NORML in the past. Thanks for your support. We need to continue giving…again…and again…until pot smokers are no longer criminals in the USA. We must work together and support the dogged and heroic struggle NORML is waging. Together, we can bring an end to a prohibition that is bringing far greater harm to our nation than the problem it is trying to address.

Matching Grant—Double Your Donation!
Please join me in making a tax-deductible donation of $100 or more to NORML. Your end-of-the-year contribution will help to assure that NORML can continue its vital work. Plus, thanks to support of longstanding NORML funders, the amount you donate to NORML today will be matched dollar for dollar (up to $30,000) – making your contribution go twice as far and work twice as hard.

As 2008 approaches, let me propose a New Year’s resolution. Let this be the year you educate your friends about the importance of bringing sanity to our drug laws and to challenge those who believe that the responsible and recreational adult use of marijuana is a civil liberty to join NORML. Here’s a New Year’s challenge: Make a commitment to encourage at least three friends to become paying dues members of NORML.

In this political season, if responsible citizens who enjoy a little marijuana recreationally spoke honestly and publicly about this, perhaps our nation’s leaders would realize it is not political suicide to advocate pragmatic European-style drug policy reform.

Thank you again for your financial support of NORML. Together we can teach America that by taking the crime out of marijuana, our nation will be a better place.

Happy travels (even if you’re just staying home),

Rick Steves
NORML Advisory Board
Edmonds, Washington
http://www.ricksteves.com/

The vast majority of DWI arrests involve Standard Field Sobriety Test (SFST). The 3 tests are the Hortizontal Gaze Nystagmus, Walk and Turn, and One Leg Stand. These tests were developed by the federal government to help arrest drivers for DWI. SFSTs and the "science" behind them have never been published in any peer reviewed journal. Still, they are a standard for DWI enforcement and almost always admitted in every DWI trial.

Steve Rubenzer is a board certified forensic pyscologist and an expert on SFST. His paper, the The Psychometrics and Science of the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests is a must read for any DWI defense lawyer.

I emailed some questions which Dr. Rubenzer was kind enough to answer.

1. What should the public know about field sobriety testing?

Depends on their situation. If stopped by the police, they usually are under no obligation to perform them. If on a jury, realize that there are many problems with them.

2. How accurate are SFSTs?

That’s not easy to answer, because it depends a great deal on things like what subjects are used (high school gymnasts vs. middle aged and old fat people), BAC distribution, and ratio of sober to intoxicated subjects. Overall accuracy rates are not useful, which is why most researchers don’t rely on them.

3. What could be done to improve SFST? Better training and monitoring of police administration.

More research. Possibly expanded scoring (from present/absent to Present/absent/?) Probably should add some physical tests that don’t depend on balance and some mental tests, as WAT and OLS are largely redundant.

4. Would you take SFSTs?

Depends if I thought I would pass them

5. If SFST's are flawed, why are they so prevalent?

There is a real need for something that does what the SFSTs are supposed to do.

6. Do you believe that innocent driver's are convicted via SFSTs?

Almost certainly given the large number of DWI stops. No test is perfect, and even if the false positive rate is say 5%, 5% of one million is 50,000.

The Mornings News has a story on a Fort Worth Policy "no refusal" policy for New Years Eve. Drivers suspected of DWI will be forced to give a blood sample. A typical law enforcement holiday Constitutional desecration of the 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendment goes like this.

A suspect will be pulled over for a traffic violation. The officer will then magically find all of these signs of intoxication- bloodshot/glassy eyes, the odor of an alcoholic beverage, and slurred speech (trust me, they always find all three). The officer will fax this information to a friendly magistrate. This magistrate is assigned to sign blood draw warrants upon request. Suspects will then be forced to give a sample of blood and have no recourse if they are found to innocent later.

"We're going to get our evidence one way or another," Fort Worth Police Chief
Ralph Mendoza said.

I bet you will Mr. Mendoza. What your fascist collection of blood samples won't do is save lives. More DWI enforcement is not working. The .08 BAC standard that MADD pushed through Congress has resulted in more arrests and more fatalities. Law enforcement is wasting time arresting drivers who pose no threat to public safety while dangerous drunks go free.

Don't take my word for it. Here is another quote from Chief Mendoza. Notice the amazing lack of perspective and insight.

DWI arrests have increased 40 percent over the last year, and fatal auto
accidents in Fort Worth also continue to rise, Officer Mendoza said.

Hmmm... more arrests and more fatalities. What's a police chief to do? Arrest more and get blood!

In 2006, 77 people lost their lives in car crashes, up from 56 in 2003, according to Fort Worth police. The BAC has reached laffer curve effect with regard to fatalities. The lower the BAC, the more wasted resources, the more dangerous drunks get away.

Officer Mendoza will never care that his policy is an affront to Liberty. I only hope that someday Officer Mendoza realizes that his policy is letting deadly drivers go free.

Labels: DWI, MADD

I enjoy the writings of CS Lewis. The Screwtape Letters is a favorite book of mine.

Mr. Lewis is primarily a theologian but offers great insight into the tyranny of good intentions. If you have wondered how Drug Warriors can lie to the public, encarcerate hundreds of thousands, destroy families, advocate policies that spread AIDS, corruption, and kill innocent Americans without a hint of guilt or regret? Mr. Lewis explains-

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

The DEA, ONDCP, MADD, Center for Science in the Public Interest all show that the tyranny of good intentions is alive and well.

Just got back from Ruidoso. It has grown since I was last there after graduating law school in 02. The Mexican food in Ruidoso is below mediocre. Green Chiles are in everything to the exlusion of quality ingredients. A good Tex-Mex restaurant would own this place. If I had the resources I would open an On The Border in Ruidoso and make a ton of money.

Local Media and the "SuperBlitz"
We stayed in a cabin that lacked cable access. Therefore, I had to spend time watching local TV news. Local TV news in Dallas is so bad I gave up on it long ago. New Mexico TV media is a similar monument to the intellectual decline of our country.

New Mexico law enforcement decided to celebrate the holidays with a "Super Blitz." The SuperBlitz includes unconstitutional roadblocks to look for DWI and fish for drugs.

The reporting on the Super Blitz reflected some typical media idiocy. The newscasters glowed about the roadblocks. The threat to liberty inherent in pulling over driver's without cause warranted nary a mention on any of the newscasts I watched. What are these journalist doing? We destory the 4th amendment and the local media cheers.

There is little love for freedom these days. Which brings me to Nanny State.

Short Book Review- Nanny State
I find recreationally reading difficult at home. I'm working, blogging, running errands etc. Vacation provides most of my leisure reading time. On this trip I read Nanny State by David Harsanyi.

This book details the triumph of bureaucratic "busybodies" over personal freedom. Miserable freedom hating bureacrats are regulating away your freedom to smoke, drink, eat fast food, and otherwise be left alone by good natured statists. It is a scary book with a clear message- The enemy of freedom is government's best intentions. Read this great book.

Policy Ideas- Public Schools
I am running as a Libertarian for Texas State Representative District 10. This has led me to think about my positions on important issues to Texans. At Denny's today I formulated my ideas for education. The Texas LP has a great platform on the issue, but it's a little short on details.

First of all, I think taxing property is abhorrent, but that is how we fund schools in Texas. I would do away with the taxing the value of property and the government's stealing of homes. That fight is probably not winnable in the short term.

Therefore, I propose a 100% property tax credit for any money spent for private or home schooling. Public schools compete with private schools for funding. Competition creates diversity, efficiency, and excellence in all markets- including education.

Casinos, Texas, and Senior Citizens
I visited the Inn of the Mountain Gods in Ruidoso. They have a beautiful new facility for gaming and eating. The buffet was horrible, the casino was nice.

Every casino I visit reminds of the hypocritical Texas gaming ban. Texas has a state lottery but if you try to play poker we send in a SWAT team.

Free people should be allowed to bet on cards without the fear of a paramillitary raid. My wife an I lost some money on the slots and had a fun time doing it. We should be losing this money in Texas.

Casinos, and slots in particular are a big hit with senior citizens. Every casino I visit has scores of older Americans tethered to a slot machine. One bizarre sight- an older woman in a personal scooter, with an oxygen tank and tube in her nose... smoking a cigarrette.

Naturally my thoughts turned to the federal pyramid schemes of social security and medicare. I wondered how much money the federal government spent on all the motor scooters in that casino, and how much the smoking lady's oxygen tank cost.

It should be none of my business who spends their money at a casino. However, the government creates generational conflict when it steals my income.

I am going to Ruidoso for Christmas. No updates until next Thursday. I look forward to some skiing, gambling, hot tubing, and reading.

Here are two posts I consider rough drafts. I wanted to polish them but I'll post them as filler until I return.

I need a platform- Marijuana
It has occurred to me that as a canidate I need a position on a lot of issues. I would like to start with the easy issues. Today I am brainstorming cannabis solutions for Texas.

I believe in self ownership, adults have the right to smoke what they want. If I could I would legalize controlled substances for adult consumption. However, I am running for State Rep, not King of Texas so I am trying to think of politically acceptable solutions.

On Marijuana Possession-
Idea 1- I would like to create an affirmative defense to Possession or sale of Marijuana. Anyone over 18 who purchases Marijuana tax stamps could not be convicted. The effect would be two fold. An increase in tax revenue and a decrease is jail space, court time, and prosecutorial effort wasted on cannabis prohibiton.

Idea 2- Repeal paraphanelia laws for sale and possession. Bongs are not dangerous, let people buy and sell them.

Reasonable Penal Searches
You are a police officer investigating a sexual assault. You need to gather a DNA sample from a suspect's penis. Do you-

a) Do some police work, find a magistrate to sign a warrant to collect the evidence or
b) Just demand the DNA sample from the defendant knowing the Court of Appeals will find a way to justify any unconstitutional activity?

If you chose B you would are ready to work in law enforcement. The 10th appellate court in Austin held that searching a suspect's penis without a warrant is "reasonable." Who would not expect a police officer to take swab their genitals? Privacy is so 19th century.

The 4th amendment has been exceptioned into non existence.

How did we turn this-

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Into this - (the TCDLA SDR headline)

Warrantless Swabbing of Defendant's Penis to Obtain DNA Evidence was a Reasonable Search under the Fourth Amendment Ontiveros v. State, 2007 WL 2274832

The officer in this case did not even attempt to secure a warrant. He never considered even calling a magistrate. Then again, why would he? Law enforcement knows that the Texas Court of Appeals frequently creates 4th amendment exceptions to save searhes.

A pragmatic view would be that, if the defedant is guilty of a horrible crime why not just allow these searches? It is true that the evidence points to Ontiveros' guilt. However, the 4th Amendment protects the innocent and the integrity of the system. I hope that saving this conviction is worth creating yet another exception to the beleaguered 4th amendment.

US News has announced that attorneys are among the 13 most overrated careers for 2008. Here is the anaylsis-

Most lawyers' lives bear little resemblance to those on Law and Order. Even litigators spend lots of time drafting or poring over sheaves of detailed information and negotiating with other lawyers prone to contentiousness and chicanery. And most lawyers rarely go to trials, working instead as transactional attorneys who need to bill 2,000 hours a year or more to meet the firm's targets. That can mean long evenings drafting lengthy, airtight contracts or other documents. In the corporate world, many lawyers find little fulfillment and burn out.

There is some truth to the article. I have dabbled in business law and I hated it. Fighting over who owes who and how we are all going to get paid- not something I could do 40 hours a week. I have friends who work for transactional firms and spend a lot of time drafting or taking depositions. Not something I could make my life's work.

Here is the solution that US News leaves out. Do not go to law school just to go to law school. Graduate school is an expensive endeavor. Law school is 3 years and thousands in student loans you won't get back. MBA's are only 2 years and if you want to work for corporate America then get an advanced business degree.

If you are in law school find your career. Criminal Law with Professor Bubany was the moment I I knew I was going to be a criminal defense lawyer. I hated watching the 4th Amendment get gutted week after week. I took as many criminal law classes as Tech offered which helped confirm my career choice.

Secured Transactions class had the opposite effect. After that class I knew that I would never ever work in any field that dealt with perfecting secured interests.

The desperation to get that first job out of law school may leave you settling for a career you hate. It was not easy to find a first job in criminal law. I moved to Wichita Falls and became a public defender. The pay was bad and I knew no one in WF. It was a sacrifice to start my career.
Even today Criminal defense does not pay as well as handling corporate mergers or car wrecks. That is a tradeoff I gladly make.

I meet interesting people through this blog. Today I had the chance to talk with Steven Nicely of K9 Consultants of America. Mr. Nicely was kind enough to answer a few questions about drug dogs. Mr. Nicely is a consultant out of Austin and an expert witness on drug dogs. Here is our Q&A.

1. What is your background/experience?
I started in law enforcement and then K9 while in the Marine Corps during the 1970’s. You can find my CV at http://k9consultantsofamerica.com/CVupdage3.htm

2. How accurate are drug dogs in your experience?
Currently, the dogs I have reviewed are at 52% accurate. This means that 52% of their responses in field conditions drugs are actually found.

3. Why so low?
The training and testing (certification standards) are not designed to identify things that can cause a dog to respond improperly so they can be eliminated.

4. What is a “cold find”?
This term along with many others used by dog handlers and trainers is jargon. My experience with those that use it means drugs were believed to be present but are not long.

5. What are some common mistakes handlers make?
The first and most common mistake made by handlers believes their dog is always correct.
Handlers receiving information about traffic stop is another. The fact that a person was traveling from a source point to a designation point, nervous, perhaps contradicted his statements does not make the dog perform any better. They have no reason to know this information. As a matter of fact it can cause a response based on “Clever Hans.”

6. How could the drug dog system be improved?
Require by law handlers record every time the dog searches to provide PC, the number of times the dog responds, and the number of times drugs were actually found and tested. On a new dog if at any time it would become impossible for the dog to be at 80% of its responses producing drugs it is removed from service, retrained, and retested. If the second time it fails a decision has to be made if it is the dog, handler, or trainer causing the problems. Replace the one causing the problem.

Prosecute a handler in Texas for Official Misconduct if he or she fails to keep those records, and for Official Oppression if a dog that is below 80% is used and a search is conducted as a result of the dog’s response. This seems harsh but sadly most of the trainers and handlers I have met do not want to improve their dogs. They need to think as behavior scientist when it comes to the training of their dogs, and not what will get me in someone’s vehicle. If they thought as behavioral scientist and were constantly trying to improve their dog’s they would get a lot more drugs off the street.

Only the War on Drugs could take the greatest companion animal ever, the dog, and make it an unwitting accomplice to Constitutional destruction. I filed an open records request for all narcotics detection canines in Kaufman County. I received the training manual and statistical history of Galvin, #DPS66.

Galvin has been brainwashed by the good people at DPS to sniff out non violent offenders... I mean to find narcotics. Galvin's natural prey drive and love for humans has been redirected into Prohibition enforcement.

Much like baseball players drug dogs have career stats pages. Here are Galvin's-

Consent Searches
Between 2005 and 2007 Galvin has recorded 381 searches. Of those 118 are listed as "consent" searches. This list came without any instructions or definitions. My guess is that"consent" searches are those in which the officer lacked probable cause and asked the suspect "Do you mind if we search your car?"

I hate the "Do you mind" search questions. They should be outlawed. Such a serious waiver of rights should not be shrouded in such benign phrasing. The implication of "do you mind" questions is that only some rude criminal would dare "mind" that a noble officer searches his car sans warrant.

Officers should be required to state "Do you mind waiving the 4th amendment and curing any Constitutional violations I am committing by searching you without probable cause?" or "You know that Bill of Rights, I am going to piss on it, will you help me?"

Of these consent searches 71 resulted in no drugs being found. Fishing expeditions for drugs are only a complete failure 60% of the time.

What is a Cold Find?
This report also mentions a "Cold Find". I have no idea what a "cold find" is. Do you know? Some reader input would be appreciated here.

Alert- No Drugs
How often is Galvin flat out wrong? How many times does he signal "drugs" and none are found? At least 17 times out of the 381 searches. Does that mean Galvin is 95% accurate?

Not really. Galvin did not alert at all 266 times. "No alert, no find" is the most common scenario for a search. Out of 381 uses of the drug dog 2/3 are a complete waste of time.

381-266=115. I am assuming that the "cold find" and "prior evidence" finds include an alert by Galvin. That would make Galvin wrong over 10% of the time he "alerts."

Galvin
I have never met Galvin. I am sure he is a great dog. I do not hold him responsible for the failed policies we force upon him. However, we allow "alerts" by drug dogs to establish probable cause. With a dog that is wrong at least 10% of the time the courts should (and won't) rethink that policy.

With a drug dog search policy that does not find drugs 2/3 of the time, we should all rethink Prohibition enforcement.

MADD- Telling Utahns what to drink Utah MADD is trying to ban flavored malt alcohol from Utah supermarkets. MADD claims this new law will help stop underage drinking. Technically they could be right. Any law that makes purchasing alcohol more difficult could be argued to cut down on underage drinking.

Does MADD have any studies that show banning malt liquor will reduce drunk driving deaths or underage drinking? No. But never let logic get in the way of a quasi religious crusade against alcohol. MADD has morphed from victim advocacy into the PETA of Prohibitionism.

A Real DWI Solution
DUI blog is one of my favorites. Lawrence Taylor authored my go to DWI book. This post is the best solution to winning the war on drunk driving I have ever read. Here is Taylor's breakdown of the problem.

1. The system, clearly, does not work: despite unfair laws, constitutional violations and increasingly harsh penalties, the problem remains…and people continue to die on the highways. 2. Playing games with statistics, as MADD and the government are so fond of doing, only obscures the problem. 3. The problem is not black-and-white, but involves shades of gray. It is convenient to punish anyone with a .08% blood-alcohol concentration, but neither fair nor productive. It is easy to lump all offenders into the same category of “drunk drivers” and simply adjust jail time by a reading on a machine, but neither fair nor productive. 4. You cannot simply identify what the problem is (“drunk drivers are dangerous”), but who the problem is. The problem is not people who drive with .08% BAC or higher, but people who represent a real danger to others on the highway. Who are they?

He also offers a great solution. Read the rest for yourself. It is time to replace MADD, they are out of ideas. Mr. Taylor offers a new vision that should be explored.

Bush, Baseball, and Steroids- Who Cares
No one is surprised that MLB players use steroids. There is a lot of discussion about the effect of the Mitchell Report on MLB's popularity. My question is- Why is steroid use a federal crime?

Let me look to our President for guidance. George W said"When they violate their bodies, they are sending a terrible signal to our nation's youth." That's it? Should we arrest fat people to teach kids to work out?

Here is a message for our nation's youth- You are all going to be adults someday. You will have to make tough decisions. Hopefully, you will never be incarcerated to "send a signal" to anyone.

This is getting farcical. I can not tell if I am being stonewalled deliberately or through bureaucratic incompetence. To recap, I emailed ONDCP requesting a copy of their emplyoee drug testing procedures. I sent this original request and was met with this response.

To continue, here is my reply to the ONDCP response-

ONDCP promotes work and random student drug testing. I want to see
if you apply the same standards to your own employees. I plan on publishing
your answers or lack thereof, on my blog. Is that specific enough for you?

RG

Yvonne, my friendly federal propagandist replied as follows.

Dear Mr. Guest,

Thank you for contacting ONDCP.

Your inquiry requires additional research and has been forwarded to the appropriate personnel for review. As soon as an answer is received, we will forward the information to you. Thank you for your patience.

Please let us know if you have any further questions.

Thank you,

Yvonne
Customer Service Specialist
ONDCP Clearinghouse

Additional research? How many federal employees does it take to call the HR department? I shudder to think how many tax dollars are wasted at ONDCP. And the Dems want these people in charge of health care?

Labels: Federal Government, open records

Robert Guest for State Rep District 10 I filed with the Texas Libertarian Party to run for State Representative District 10. I can not decide how much to blog about this experience. I am sure it will provide endless inspiration but I do not want this to turn IWTS into a full time campaign blog. I am excited and I hope to spread some ideas about freedom, criminal justice, and the future of Texas.

If you are a libertarian let me encourage you to run for office. Voters need a choice between statism and freedom and the LP can always use good canidates. It is really not that hard to do. I'd be glad to help point you in the right direction. Shoot me an email if interested.

Should Illegal Drugs Be Legal?
The Foundation for Responsible Television filmed this great series in Dallas. I was going to be in the audience but criminal defense practice has a way of cancelling plans for you. Watch the video here.

Chat With The The Drug Czar
Drug Czar John Walters is accepting questions for an upcoming online chat. I sent two questions. I look forward to not being answered. Here they are-
1. Would legalizing marijuana end the billion dollar monopoly organize crime has on the domestic marijuana market and take these profits away from drug cartels?
2. Has your office ever advocated for an extension of the 4th or 5th amendment, or for more privacy protection in any situation?

I sent easy questions. In case Mr. Watlers needs help the answers are Yes, and No. I hope more American have the courage to question Prohibition. Send in your questions and let the Drug Czar know your concerns.

I Didn't Know I Could Refuse That
During my DWI intake interviews I hear that phrase over and over in regards to field sobriety testing. You have the right to refuse roadside field sobriety tests. The police can and will still arrest you, and the Prosecutor will argue that you refused because you are drunk.

Personally, I would never take an HGN (follow the pen with your eyes) test. It is junk science performed without proper training. The worst part is that the test is not captured on video. That makes it very difficult to cross examine the officer on his conclusions.

December 5th 1933 was the day America ended alcohol Prohibition. To mark the 75th anniversary, Dana Rohrabacher a Republican Congressman from California, gave this speech last week on the House floor.

Why did America reject the prohibition of alcoholic beverages? Well, when government attempts to control the peaceful behavior of its citizens, it often sets in motion forces that are more dangerous than the social evil that they are trying to control. Today’s war on drugs is perhaps an example. The war on drugs has resulted in a multimillion dollar network of violent organized crime. The war on drugs has created the deaths by drive-by shootings and turf wars among gangs in our cities. The war on drugs has overcrowded our prisons. More than half of Federal prison space is occupied by nonviolent drug users. The war on drugs has corrupted our police and crowded our courts. We apparently did not learn the lesson of the prohibition of alcoholic beverages.

Today, on the campaign trail we hear new calls for prohibitions on cigarettes, on fatty foods, and even more money should be spent, yes, on the war on drugs.

So many people have been hurt by the war on drugs; yet we keep it because we want to supposedly help people. Well, I would suggest that this 75th anniversary of the repeal of prohibition, which was the greatest failure of American social planning in the history of our country

Are there cops in your bedroom? Should there be? The State of Texas has long considered sex between adults just another area for regulation. Until 2003 consensual adult homosexual sex was a crime in the Lone Star State. Like most bad laws it was rarely enforced. The Supreme Court ruled that the law furthered no legitimate state interest.

Undettered, the State of Texas still enforces a bizarre ban on vibrators. Possessing six or more "obscene devices" is a state jail felony, with a minimum sentence of 6 months in jail. Like most stupid laws, this one is rarely enforced. Only in Texas could selling "obscene devices" carrying the same sentence as Burglary of a Building.

If Texas can not outlaw certain sexual activity, it at least wants to tax it. Last year the legislature passed a $5 tax on strip club patrons to fund sexual assault prevention. The idea being that strip club patrons are somehow responsible for sexual assaults. The only assaults occuring at strip clubs are on the patron's credit cards.

Swinging in Duncanville
Currently, the Dallas media is in a tizzy over a swingers club at a private residence in Duncanville. The City of Duncanville recently passed an ordinance to shut the club down even though no illegal activity has ever taken place.

The new ordinance makes it illegal to operate a "sex club." What is a sex club? "Any premise, person or organization that is presented, advertised or provides notification to the public that it is a swinger's club, an adult encounter group or center or that provides an opportunity or an invitation to engage in or view sexual activity, stimulation or gratification."

I would now like to announce that the Duncanville Police Station provides an opportunity to engage or view sexual activity and stimulation. According to statute I have now made the DPD station a sex club.

Osama Bin Laden or Ron Jeremy ?
Regulating morality is not limited to intrusive state laws. While questioning the new Attorney General nominee Michael Mukasey, Utah Senator Orrin Hatch called for an increase in "mainstream obscenity" prosecutions.

I have read the Constitution and I can not find any provision for the federal government to regulate porno. To the contrary the First Amendment would seem to protect mainstream obscenity. The Supreme Court disagrees and has set confusing and nearly unenforcable rules for criminalizng obscenity. Senator Hatch is merely continuing the recent trend of using the Attorney General's office to destroy Constitutional protections.

However, in an age of terrorism fighting "mainstream obscenity" is a dangerous waste of law enforcement resources. Hatch calls for "more FBI agents and prosecutors" dedicated to fighting the porno threat. Remember opportunity costs. I do not take off my shoes at the airport because porn stars are trying to kill us.

There is no morality in government, merely hypocrisy. If recent history holds true I predict that Orrin Hatch will soon be arrested for selling child pornography.

Prosecuting Inflatable Sheep
I only prosecuted one case involving promotion of obscene materials. The defendant pulled up to a 7-11 parking lot and displayed a van full of various obscene items for sale. A concerned citizen called and the defendant was arrested.

Our office had a great laugh at the list of contraband, including inflatable sheep (really, no really)and something called "the torpedo", inter alia. This defendant could not make bail and served 20+ days in jail.

The office had some debate on prosecuting this case. The popular opinion being that you shouldn't sell adult items out of a van where children could see it. However, Texas law does not allow retail stores to sell inflatable sheep so the market responds with the mobile seller.

Hatch, Paul, and Freedom
Adults should be free to make their own decisions when it comes to mainstream obscentiy and obscene devices. Sending police into bust up adult bookstores is an embarassing waste of tax dollars. Just because Orrin Hatch does not like porn does not mean we need to use the FBI to arrest those who sell it. Mr. Hatch should simply quit buying porn if it upsets him so much. A boycott is always a better approach than a SWAT team.

Only one candidate stands up for the right of adults to live their lives without federal morality police watching every move. Check out John Stossel interviewing Ron Paul on prostitution, gay marriage, and drugs inter alia.

The Kaufmnan Herald has a good article about the Kaufman Public Defender. I was a pubic defender out of law school, it is a tough job for many reasons from bad breath to mental illness to clients who berate and.or do not trust you.

Kaufman's Public Defender office was created a year ago and everyone interviewed glows about the office's successful first year. By all account Andrew Jordan has created an effective office out of nothing; no small task. Texas has a handful of Public Defender's offices, most indigent defense is handled by private court appointed attorneys.

The news article seems to focus on the cost savings to the county. Much is made over the fact that the average cost per case is down 50% over 2005-2006. Is that a good thing? I know the county wants to save money but the government created the need for indigent defense. Instead of looking for the cheapest defense maybe we should rethink our incarceration epidemic.

Chief Public Defender Andrew Jordan shows some insight into the frustrations that come with having scores of mentally ill in the criminal justice system. Here is a great quote-

“Sadly, over the last several years the Legislature has continued to under fund programs that care for people with recognized mental illnesses.”According to Jordan, the result has been that the county jail has become the de facto care facility for citizens who, through no fault of their own, can't interact in society. “In addition to being expensive and presenting a liability issue for Kaufman County, it's simply inhumane,” Jordan said. “Many of these individuals also qualify for my office's services so that area of the law is of particular importance to me. Hopefully in another year I can report that we have found a way to balance public safety against the absolute need to take a more compassionate approach to the mentally ill who enter our criminal justice system.”

That is absolutely true. The mentally ill are constantly arrested and shuffled through the criminal justice system. When I was a prosecutor in East Texas we had a few defendants who constantly got arrested for "criminal trespass." Here was the common scenario.

George is a homeless mentally ill alcoholic. Bill, who owns the local 7-11 is tired of George showing up drunk and begging for money in the parking lot. Bill has the police give George a criminal trespass warning. George is now banned from the 7-11.

George is still a homeless mentally ill alcoholic and returns frequently to the 7-11. George is arrested for criminal trespass and can not make bail. George is too mentally ill to plead guilty to anything, and the State treatment facilities are full and will not take George for a few months. Robert, the friendly prosecutor routinely drops charges against George to get him out of the County Jail because it is too expensive to incarcerate the mentally ill indefinitely.

A variation on the scenario- Sometimes the mentally ill would get back on their meds in jail and sober up to the point the could plead guilty if they wanted to.

For good reading on Mental Health problems in Texas Criminal Justice, have some Grits.