CAN A NON-CITIZEN VOTE?

NO!

The penalties for non-citizens attempting to vote in a country's election can be severe, especially in countries like the United States. In the U.S., for example, non-citizens who vote in federal elections can face criminal charges, which may include:

1. Fines: Non-citizens who unlawfully vote may be fined under federal law.
2. Imprisonment: Convictions can result in imprisonment for up to five years.
3. Deportation: Non-citizens found guilty of voting illegally may also be deported and barred from reentering the U.S.
4. Permanent Bar from Citizenship: In some cases, attempting to vote may permanently disqualify a non-citizen from becoming a U.S. citizen in the future.

SPECIAL EDITION-TRIAL DOGS, COVID AWARDS, AND ZOOM HEROES 2019-20

It's been quite a year for Justice in Travis County.  With the changing of the guard at the District and County Attorney's office, in 2021 there will be changes.  But before we plod forward, let's recognize the efforts from this past year.  Some of these awards will be pre-covid, some after.  The committee has spoken:

ANTORCHA DE JUSTICIA AWARD

Tom Weber (Posthumous)

Ira Davis (Posthumous)

TRIAL DOGS 2019-20

Ariel Payan

Russ Hunt

Margaret Chen Kircher

Steve Brand

Victoria Winkeler

Raymond Espersen

Richard Jennings

Andrea Austin

Victor Arana

Leonard Martinez

William Browning

Rob Shepherd

Brian McConnell

Kleon Andradis

WORKHORSE AWARD

Charles Popper

Cheryl Hindera

COVID AWARDS [Crisis Management]

Bradley Hargis -Technology Award

The Clerk's Office -Work Ethic Award

The Techshare Administrators - Information Technology Award

ZOOM AWARDS 2020

BEST QUOTES

"You're on mute!"

"Please mute your mic!"

BEST DRESSED ZOOMERS (at least from the waist up)

Andrea Jarero

Rick Flores

Cesar Rodriguez

Deniz Kadirhan

Lisa McCormick

BEST DRESSED JUDGES

All of them.  They all wore the same black robe.

BEST ZOOMER BACKGROUNDS

Delani Long-The fireplace kept us warm.

Bill Hines-From a boat? Whaa?

Nicolette Vaughn-Starbucks is a good place to do business.

BEST HEADBOARDS WHILE ZOOMING IN BED

No, not going there.

"CASTAWAY" AWARD

Jodi Sims - Where's Wilson?

"OUT OF THIS WORLD" AWARD

Johnny Urrutia - Houston, are you seeing this?

"ARROWHEAD" AWARD

Amber Farrelly - I need this like a hole in the head.

"GHOST" award

Samuel Rosen - Help from Beyond?

YEAR IN REVIEW 2015-TRIALS AND OTHER ASSORTED FUN

CALM BEFORE THE STORM

It's hard to declare whether a trial result is a "victory" or not. Different factors such as the pretrial offer, overall exposure to prison, and facts of the case usually dictate whether the effort in preparation and performance in trial paid off.  What follows are quick summaries of the trials, the result, and where it ranks on the victory meter.  Many thanks to all those who helped.

2015 was not quite as active as 2014, but it started with two trials and then I had a break until December.  2016 may yet set the record.  We'll see.

TRIAL #1
Williamson County 26th District Court
Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon, Serious Bodily Injury, Family Violence
State v Everton Roxroy Bailey
Length:  4 days
Penalty Range:  5-99 Years
Result:  Conviction 37 Years

The Defendant was convicted of pouring boiling water on his wife.  The pretrial offer was 40 years, then 30.  I was the third lawyer on the case.
Rank:  Moderate Victory by the Prosecution

TRIAL #2
Travis County 147th District Court
Murder
State v. George Delacruz
Length: 8 days
Penalty Range: 5-99 Years
Result:  Conviction Life

The Defendant was convicted of killing his wife.  There was no body of the wife ever found.  After 8 days of testimony the jury convicted.  There are several issues on appeal and the finality of the case will take some time.
Rank:  Temporary Victory by the Prosecution

TRIAL #3
Travis County County Court #4
Assault Family Violence Stranglation
State v. Romien Pierce
Length: 3 days
Penalty Range:  2-10 Years
Result:  Plea for Deferred Adjudication just prior to closing argument

The Defendant was accused of strangling his then girlfriend.  After various inconsistencies in the stories, the Defendant testifying, and some jury irregularities, the Defendant decided to accept the state's offer of Deferred.  He had been in jail more than a year.
Rank:  Moderate Victory by Defense

2016 is already shaping up to be the year of the trial (topping 2014 if you can believe that!).  I have 5 jury trials set from the first of February until mid April.  I have been preparing for all of them and I will be ready.  But I will also be ready for that vacation scheduled for this summer.

LEGISLATIVE FOLLY

       It's tough as a criminal defense lawyer who defends the Constitution each and every day to understand how a legislature composed of legislators not versed in criminal law, can effectively come up with laws that affect the safety of every Texan.  Every Texan wishes to live in the security of their own home, free from the intrusion of not only criminals, but of the government as well.

       This legislative session was no different.  The legislature, devoid of people  of criminal law experience, passed yet additional set of laws that do not make us safe nor secure.

       Take for example, Penal Code Section 43.26: Possession or Promotion of Child Pornography.  Under the new revisions, primarily HB 2291, this change will actually lower the punishment range of repeat offenders who have been convicted of two prior offenses from 25-99 years (under the standard enhancements under Art. 12.42(d)), to 5-99 years under the controlling provisions of the new bill.  In other words, the inexperienced ones in the legislature have given us less potential punishment for those persons keeping and peddling child pornography.  What were they thinking.  From the Defense angle, it gives more flexibility.

      

BLOOD DRAWS: The Sequel

Ok, Ok, I know. I've advocated for blood draws under a higher standard under certain conditions and stopping there. But who would have thought that shortly thereafter, I would be rear-ended by an apparent intoxicated driver on Route 79 in Round Rock coming home from my office today.

I was driving westbound on 79. As I slowed for the light on Sunrise, I glanced in my rear-view mirror to see a van going a bit too fast to stop. As I eased up on the brake to absorb the impact, the van struck me. I departed from my vehicle to see a somewhat disoriented person behind the wheel. Motioning to a nearby parking lot, he followed me into the lot and proceeded to ramble some incoherent blather. Interestingly, a women in a white van followed us in, motioned me over and proceeded to inform me she was on the phone with the police about his erratic driving prior to the accident.

After I exchanged insurance info with him (with the help of the police), I left. As I was leaving, the police were beginning the SFST's. I didn't stick around. The policeman called me later and informed me that the driver was arrested for DWI 2nd. I was told he admitted to 3 beers and an undisclosed amount of Xanax.

So, is this an appropriate scenario for a blood draw? Under the current APD policy, it is if there is a total refusal. Is that appropriate--collision, prior DWI, and total refusal (I don't know if he refused on this, but let's say he did)? I feel the public's pain (literally). I can see no powerful legal argument to counter the public opinion to get tougher on drivers like these, even if we suggest a higher standard for warrants.

If we as lawyers are going to try to limit the use of blood draws, we had better find an argument that is going to jolt the public to action at least as hard as I was jolted out of my seat today. To this end it will be no small task.

Am I still advocating the policy in my previous post? Hey, I'll get back to you on that.