by Houston Criminal Defense Attorney

Hurricane Season.

With the 2015 Hurricane season underway, and with tropical developments already effecting Houston, here is a  “to do” list before, during, and after the storm, including what to do if you have a court date approaching.

Before the Storm, have:

• your car tank filled with gasoline;
• a fire extinguisher;
• first aid supplies and prescription medications;
• charcoal, lighter fluid, lighter or matches;
• candles;
• flashlight, battery-operated radio (for news updates) and a two week supply of batteries;
• bottled water; cooler, ice/gel packs;
• hammer, nails, making tape, plywood and plastic for quick home repairs;
• clean up supplies (i.e. mops, brooms, rakes, pails;
• non-perishable food items, eating utensils, plates, cups, and a manual can opener;
• protective clothing and rain gear;
• removed anything in your lawn that could be blown away;
• inspected any hazards, such as old trees that could fall;
• take video/photos for a home inventory;
• check your insurance policies
• if you feel like being proactive get a gas-powered generator.

During the Storm:

• Stay inside, away from windows, skylights, and glass doors;
• If power is lost, turn off major appliances to reduce “power surge” when electricity is restored;
• Store valuables and personal papers in waterproof containers on the highest level of your home;
• Turn fridge to coldest setting.

After the Storm:

• Be aware of high water or fallen power lines when driving;
• if your home or building has structural damage, do not enter until it has been checked by officials;
• be aware of snakes;
• Do not drink or prepare food with tap water until certain it is not contaminated
• If damage occurred, notify your insurance company.  Keep records of your clean up costs.

Court date approaching:

• Visit the District Clerk’s website (if accessible);
• Contact your bail company;
• Contact your attorney;
• Contact the court.

The counties tend to wait till the last minute to make decisions on court closings.  Unless you hear otherwise, plan on being in court.  Do not however, put yourself in danger to do so.  If you have an issue, notify your attorney who will get in touch with the court staff for you.

by Houston Criminal Defense Attorney

84th Texas Legislative Session – Criminal Justice

The 84th Texas Legislative Session just ended.  Below are both passed and denied bills related to criminal justice.

Belief will be passed:

• ending the “pick-a-pal” grand jury system;
  • Why it matters: In light of fierce national debate over the diversity of jurors, this law allows for random selection of grand jurors as opposed to the judge asking an acquaintance to come up with a list of individuals.  Texas is the last state to switch from the so-called “key-man” or “pick-a-pal” system.
• scaling back the use of state youth prisons;
  • Why it matters: this law provides alternative family-centric provisions to incarcerated juveniles.  The focus is on rehabilitation.
• adjusting property theft thresholds for inflation:
  • Why it matters: Theft punishment ranges are determined by property value.  The problem was the difference in being charged with a misdemeanor or a felony had not been adjusted since 1993.  A $30 item in 1993 would have been a class C misdemeanor.  That same item in 2015, would be $50, or a class B misdemeanor.
• expunctions for lesser offenses: Note: this bill was vetoed by the governor.
  • Why it matters:  If you were arrested for example, for DWI and plead guilty to obstruction of a highway, you can now have the DWI expunged or erased.
• reduction of state jail felony to class A misdemeanor: Note: this bill was vetoed by the governor.
  • Why it matter:  Under this law if you plead guilty to a state jail felony, receive community supervision and meet additional requirements you can motion the court to reduce the felony to a misdemeanor.  If the judge grants the motion you will no longer have a felony conviction.   
• decriminalizing truancy: 
  • Why it matters: Failure to Attend School (FTAS) or “truancy” was a class C misdemeanor.  The focus will now shift toward truancy prevention as opposed to writing kids a bunch of tickets.

What could have been (denied or stalled):

• the good samaritan bill that would have protected people from prosecution if they call 911 to report a drug overdose;
• low risk prisoners given the alternative of home confinement as opposed to prison;
• Decriminalizing Marijuana;
• Treating 17 year olds as juveniles rather than adults;
• The “ban-the-box” bill that would have prohibited state agencies from asking about one’s criminal history on a job application;
• Asset Forfeiture upon certain arrests.

by Houston Criminal Defense Attorney

Deal or No Deal?

Recent headlines have been filled by criminal charges against NFL star running back Adrian Peterson. From the get go Peterson maintained his innocence. In a statement issued September 15 he said, “I never intended to harm my son. I will say the same thing once I have my day in court”.  On November 3, 2014 his day in court came and when asked how do you plead to the charges, he responded, “no contest”  Wasn’t he just insisting he was innocent? Maybe he was innocent; maybe he wasn’t. Regardless, the system doesn’t care.

The American Injustice System?

Mr. Peterson was formally indicted and charged for the offense of Injury to a Child under Tex. Pen. Code 22.04 (a)(3). This offense is a state jail felony, with a punishment range up to two years in prison and/or up to a $10,000 fine. State jail felony convictions are day for day (i.e. 365 days means 365 days).   He plead “no contest” (i.e. guilty) to reckless assault, a Class A misdemeanor and received a two year deferred adjudication conditioned upon a $4000 fine, plus court costs, and eighty hours of community service. Upon successful completion of the deferred adjudication he will be eligible for a non-disclosure. Make no mistake about it this was a good deal. He avoids jail time; he avoids a felony; he avoids a final conviction; and he can have his record blocked in the future. In just a few months he went from “having his day in court” with the possibility of a felony conviction and up to two years in state jail, to a “no contest” misdemeanor conviction and zero days in an orange jumpsuit.

Welcome to the American Justice System. But he was guilty, you say. Maybe he was, but let’s assume he wasn’t. In fact, let’s assume it was you who was arrested for a crime you did not commit. Let’s assume you faced the very situation Mr. Peterson did, deal or no deal? What if you were wrongfully charged with murder with the possibility of life in prison, but were offered a lesser charge of ten years in prison? Would you take the ten or would you seek your day in court? William Kelly found himself in that very situation and took the ten. Two years later DNA revealed the State had the wrong guy and Mr. Kelly was exonerated. He isn’t alone.

A statistic released by the Innocence Project (an organization dedicated to exonerating those who have been wrongfully convicted) revealed of the three hundred people the project has proven were wrongfully convicted of rape and murder, at least 10%, plead guilty to those crimes. Think about that. Thirty people stood up in court, walked to the bench, looked the judge in the eye, and said they were guilty of a crime they DID NOT COMMIT. Criminologists recently estimated of the 2.2 million Americans in prison, over 2 million are there because of plea bargains. Of those 2 million, somewhere between 2 – 8 % plead guilty to crimes they DID NOT COMMIT. That means 40,000 – 160,000 people are sitting in jail for something they did not do.

But why would an innocent person plead guilty? United States District Court Judge Jed S. Rakoff, in his recent article for the New York Review of Books, “Why Innocent People Plead Guilty” reasoned innocent people often plead guilty to avoid the potential, lurking harsh sentence at trial. He notes the scenario can be seen played out at your local courthouse time and time again. The accused is charged with a crime. The prosecutor offers a lesser punishment or even a lesser charge in exchange for a guilty plea. To assist in making the accused’s decision, the prosecutor threatens with enhancements, additional charges, or “take it or leave it” offers. The court is anxious to move their docket. The prosecutor is anxious to get a conviction. The accused has been living the nightmare for over a year and is tired. The pressure has taken its toll. The deal is accepted. The accused pleads guilty. But, is he? Rakoff expresses his concern that prosecutors have too much power, acting with “virtual impunity”, in determining the fate of an accused.

How did the American Justice System get to this point? Judge Rakoff explains, as crime rates rose over the years, plea bargaining offered a way out. Cases could be resolved without burdening the system with additional trials. The accused could avoid jail or less jail time. The government could get a conviction without using further money, resources, and time.  As crime rates continued to rise (especially drug and violent crimes) and with the passing of “tough on crime” legislation, plea bargains began occurring at extremely high rates.  It is estimated approximately 95% of criminal cases, not dismissed, result in a deal. Judge Rakoff states, the flaw is in deals determined largely by the prosecutor and government policy, with little judicial input.  Subtle, small things such as the mood of a government employee that day can have its effect.  I would add defense attorneys unwilling to set cases for trial add to the high number of plea bargains. The judge expresses the system in the United States has evolved into a far cry from what Thomas Jefferson and co. contemplated, what the movies and television portray, or what the average American believes.  Justice Rakoff isn’t alone in his opinion. The Human Rights Watch, published a 132-page report titled An Offer You Can’t Refuse, highlighting similar problems in today’s justice system.

Of course, the American Justice System is not entirely flawed. It is still the best justice system in the world. Watch any high-profile, foreign case for confirmation.  Further, plea bargains are necessary to keep the system moving.  When done properly, a plea bargain can result in a win for both the accused and the government.  However, if innocent people are pleading guilty to crimes they did not commit; if innocent people are sitting in jail for crimes they did not commit, then our system needs help. There was a time in America where the jury-trial served not only as a truth-seeking mechanism but also as means of achieving fairness.  Have we lost sight of that original goal?

So it begs the question, if you were falsely accused of a crime, what would you do? Deal or No Deal.

by Houston Criminal Defense Attorney

State vs. Michael Phelps – DWI Defense

On October 1, 2014 at 1:40 a.m., Michael Phelps was arrested for Driving While Intoxicated.  Media outlets, sponsors, and high ranking swimming officials have been quick to assume intoxication, but was he?  What follows is an explanation of the events we know occurred, included an explanation of the breath test machine.

The National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration (NHTSA) is the “go-to” authority in detecting possibly impaired drivers.  They developed the Standardized Field Sobriety exercises to assist and coordinate police conduct during DWI stops and investigations.  NHTSA provides a 24 hour (three-day) course that teaches the background, administration and scoring for standardized field sobriety exercises.  The goal is to aid police officers to know when to stop drivers who may be intoxicated and conduct an investigation to confirm or deny their suspicions.  The problem is the police officers may have only taken this class once, often years ago, and often fail to follow the proper procedures and protocol taught by NHTSA.

NHTSA breaks the DWI investigation into three stages:

1) Vehicle in Motion; 2) Personal Contact; 3) Pre-Arrest Screening

The following is based on the FACTS we know thus far.

Phase One Vehicle in Motion:

Phelps was allegedly clocked going “84 in a 45” and “drifting out of his lane”.  Pending evidence the radar was calibrated and used correctly the stop will likely be held lawful.

Speeding is a lawful reason for an officer to stop a citizen.  Speeding is not however, an indication of intoxication.  Common sense would tell you people speed every day, whether or not they have alcohol in their system. NHTSA lists a number of visible cues to identify intoxicated drivers and speeding is not one of them.  Drifting is considered a cue of intoxication, but reading the reports literally one may conclude this was merely a single drift.  If he was traveling 84 mph, in a range rover, a drift would be expected and normal.  The highest criminal court in Texas, the Court of Criminal Appeals has said this much, stating “driving in and of itself is controlled weaving”.

At this stage it is unknown whether or not a video from the police vehicle exists.  If a video exists it may clear up some of the above.  If a video does not exist, it can be inferred it was favorable to Mr. Phelps.

Phase Two: Personal Contact:

Personal contact encompasses the face-to-face encounter with the officer and the subject (Mr. Phelps).  During this phase the officer should be making the decision whether or not he will have the subject perform the field sobriety exercises.  The officer is using his sense of sight, sense of hearing, and sense of smell sight in making the decision.

Sight:  The officer noted Red/Bloodshot Eyes;

Sound: The officer noted “mushed speech” and “admission to drinking”

Smell:  officer noted “smelled alcohol”

(other clues the officer could have noted but did not are soiled clothing, fumbling fingers, alcohol container, drugs or drug paraphernalia, bruises, bumps, or scratches, unusual actions, inconsistent responses, abusive language, unusual statements, “cover up” odors, etc.)

Red/Bloodshot eyes:  The officer is taught there are a number of things other than alcohol that can cause red/bloodshot eyes.  Fatigue is one.  We know Phelps came from a casino; It was almost 2 a.m.; he had been staring at cards and dice for hours; there may have been cigarrete smoke in close proximity.  I have been to a Casino or two in my day.  I have played cards.  I have never left a casino floor without red/bloodshot eyes.  Red/Bloodshot eyes in Phelps’ situation is normal.

Smelled Alcohol/Admission to Drinking:  Phelps said he had “3-4 beers”.  Despite what prominent Texas billboards may say it is not against the law to drink and drive.  Admitting to “3-4 beers” and smelling like alcohol is normal.

Mushed Speech”: Did the officer mean slurred speech?  A scene video would help explain “mushed speech”.  It would also be interesting to compare interviews Phelps has done over the years vs. how he sounds on the police video.  Mushed speech is not recognized by NHTSA as a sign of intoxication.

Phase Three: Pre-Arrest Screening (the field sobriety exercises):

a) Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN or “pen” test)

During the HGN test the officer has the suspect follow the motion of a small stimulus (i.e. pen) with their eyes only.  The officer is looking for involuntary jerking or bouncing of the eyes as they move toward the side.  Each eye is examined for three specific clues (6 total clues).

While I have yet to find a report indicating whether or not Phelps failed this test, my experience in how officers grade this test tells me he did.  I once had an officer fail an individual (6 clues) with only one eye (the other eye was a glass eye).  There are a number of factors that can effect the results of the HGN test.   For example, the test must be administered properly (happens less often than you would think); Additionally, there are multiple types of nystagmus unrelated and indecipherable from alcohol related nystagums.

A scene video would be the best indication to whether the test was administered properly.

b) Walk and Turn (walk the line)

We are told Phelps broke-heel-to toe stance; counted out loud; had difficulty with balance while walking; and had difficulty with balance while turning.

The clues the officer is trained to look for are: cannot balance during instructions (i.e. breaking heel-to-toe during the instruction phase); starts too soon; stops while walking; does not touch heel-to-toe (i.e. 1/2+ space between heel and toe an any step); Steps off line; Uses arms for balance (i.e. raising arms for balance more than 6″); Improper Turn; and incorrect number of steps.  If the officer notes 2/8 clues, you fail.  In fact, you can fail this test before you have taken a single step (see cannot balance during instructions and starts too soon).  In Phelps’ case the only standardized clue noted is broke heel-to-toe stance or cannot balance during instructions.  That would be 1/8 clues and a passing grade.  Without seeing the report, I’m assuming the officer added uses arms for balance and improper turn.  Giving Phelps 3/8 clues and meaning he did more things right than wrong.  Counting out loud is not a clue and the officer actually instructs the subject to count out loud during this exercise.

c) One Leg Stand

Here the officer is taught the four standardized clues are: sways while balancing; uses arms for balance; hops; puts foot down.  2/4 clues is an indication of impairment.

From what we know, Phelps “swayed slightly” and “didn’t look at elevated foot”.  I won’t address not looking at the elevated foot because that is not a standardized clue.  Subtracting that we are left with “swayed slightly”.  Again, a video would assist to see just how much sway there was, but even if Phelps did sway (remember he is on one leg), that would only be 1/4 clues and a passing grade on the one leg stand.

THE BREATH TEST = 0.14 –

Note: the breath test is being examined under the machine used in Texas (Intox5000EN)

The breath test machine currently in use in Texas is the Intoxilyzer 5000EN, manufactured by CMI, Inc.  CMI continues to service Texas’ machines, but the machine itself has been replaced at CMI by the Intoxilyzer 8000 and now the Intoxilyzer 9000.  Needless to say the Intoxilyzer500EN is outdated.  In fact it uses the same micro processing chip as ATARI.  Remember pong?

http://youtu.be/5uuxFhUc8tg

In Texas, intoxication must be proved at the time of driving, not the time of the test.  The time of the breath test is certainly important.  If the test was a few hours later the State will be unable to prove Michael Phelps was over 0.08 at the time he was driving.

Additionally, in order for there to be a valid test, and to protect against “residual mouth alcohol” (think a burp, belch, regurgitate, etc.), a certified breath test operator MUST administer a 15 minute waiting or observation period.  If this is not done correctly, the test is not considered scientifically reliable and is inadmissible as evidence.

Speaking of science, the 0.14 could be walked down to below a 0.8 taking into consideration:

– The machine’s recognized tolerance of +/- 0.02 (i.e. 0.12)

– The machines recognized potential error of +/- 0.01 (i.e. 0.11)

– The machines partition ratio.  The partition ration is the assumption the concentration of alcohol in the person’s blood is 2100 time the concentration of alcohol in the person’s breath or 2100/1.  Why does this matter?  The partition ration can affect the overall result and studies have shown the ratio can vary from 1000/1 to 3005/1.  Taking the 0.11, and using a partition ratio of 1000/1 would put Mr. Phelps at (0.11/2100 * 1000 = ) at 0.05, well below the illegal 0.08.

– Breath Temperature, Interferents,  Acid Reflux Disease, Breathing Patterns, etc. are all things that can influence a false high on the machine.

In conclusion, after seeing Mr. Phelps’ video and assuming he looks normal, his case is certainly defendable.  People trust their eyes.  If he looks good on video, if he doesn’t look intoxicated, jurors will trust what they see over the mysterious machine that should have been retired long ago with ATARI.  A machine the manufacturer, CMI, refuses to warrant “fit for its intended purpose”.  While the media is quick to assume Mr. Phelps was intoxicated, the FACTS seem to weave a different story.

 

–

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

by Houston Criminal Defense Attorney

Collateral Consequences of Criminal Convictions

Posted By: ADAMO / ADAMO

A criminal conviction can follow you around like luggage.

So before you enter into a plea of guilty you need to understand the potential consequences of doing so.  If you are charged with a drug, sex, or violent offense you need to be on high alert.

I. Possible Financial Consequences

1. Loss of Employment

FELONY CONVICTIONS and convictions for CRIMES OF MORAL TURPITUDE* can lead to the automatic revocation of and ineligibility for a wide variety of federal and state licenses.  Once upon a time, one could enter a plea of deferred adjudication and be assured the offense would never be used against them.  This has since changed, and deferreds are routinely used as disqualifications to employment.

To see a list of potential Texas licenses that may be impacted click here.

*A Crime of Moral Turpitude includes, but is not limited to: Issuance of a bad check with the intent to defraud; prostitution; theft; swindling; false report to police officer; assault by a man against a woman; indecent exposure; bigamy by a lawyer; failure to identify; delivery of a controlled substance; violation of a protective order involving family violence; failure to stop and render aid (sometimes).

2. Loss of Funding and Assistance

A. Education Funding

i. Federal Loans/Grants

• Federal education grants are unavailable to those incarcerated in federal or state penal institutions (self-explanatory).  A conviction for possession or sale of a controlled substance can make a person temporarily or permanently ineligible for federal loans or grants under the Drug Free Student Loans Act of 1998.

ii. State Loans/Grants

• Similarly, Tex. Ed. Code §54.633 states one who commits a felony or class A misdemeanor, or an offense under the Texas Controlled Substances Act, forfeits a prepaid higher education scholarship.  This includes offenses of possession of marijuana, possession or delivery of drug paraphernalia, and falsification of drug test results.  Thus, even a minor Class C misdemeanor offense (i.e. drug paraphernalia) may result in the loss of education funding.
• Many schools have adopted “zero tolerance” policies covering potential consequences for any type of criminal offense occuring both on and off campus grounds.  Check your schools disciplinary code for additional information.

B. Federally Funded Assistance Programs

• Lifetime ban on food stamps and federally funded public assistance for felony drug convictions. 21 USC 862a.
• Mandatory ineligibility for federal health care benefits for federal distribution convictions. 42 USC 1320a-7.
• Federal grant, license contracts, and other benefits are restricted for felony drug convictions.  21 USC 862.
• Exclusion of federal subsidized or funded housing for drug offenders.  42 USC 1437(1)(b).

C. Asset Forfeiture

• Asset forfeiture is a possibility in both state and federal courts.  Your home, business, automobiles, and “cash stash” can all become property of the government.  Asset forfeiture typically applies in narcotic cases, but if you are charged with a Felony DWI your vehicle may be forfeited.  In order for the government to successfully become owners of your property they must prove, generally, that the asset is “connected to” the charged offense or criminal activity.

D. Surcharges (paid to keep your license)

• Certain convictions result in license suspensions and surcharges.
  • DWI – 1st offense = $1,000 per year for 3 years;
  • DWI – 2nd offense = $1500 per year for 3 years;
  • DWI – BAC > 0.16 = $2000 per year for 3 years;
  • Driving with Invalid License = $250 per year for 3 years.

II.  Possible Rights and Privilege Consequences

A. Possession of Firearms

i. Texas Law

• A convicted felon is prohibited from possessing a firearm.  Tex. Pen. Code §46.04.  This includes an individual placed on probation, unless their “rights have been restored” under Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 42.12 §20 where the court sets aside the veridic or permits the defendant to withdraw the plea and dismisses the complaint.
• A conviction of misdemeanor family violence under Tex. Pen. Code §22.01, prohibits a person from possessing a firearm before the fifth anniversary of the later of: (1) the release from confinement or (2) the date of discharge from probation.  Tex. Pen. Code 46.04(b).
• A conviction will affect a person’s ability to obtain a concealed handgun license (CHL).  Tex. Gov. Code § 411.172.
• Texas law allows a convicted felon to possess a gun at his/her residence after five years has passed since the release from confinement or community supervision, parole or mandatory supervision, whichever date is later.  Tex. Pen. Code §46.04.

But…

In Texas you must pay attention to federal laws too.  Courts have ruled, if a state law has any exception to the restoration of rights regarding firearms (and Texas does under Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 42.12 §20) then the felony conviction prohibits one from possessing, transporting, etc. firearms and ammunition.  524 U.S. 308.  See also U.S. v. Daugherty, 264 F3d 513 (5th Cir. 2001) (where the court affirmed the conviction of felon in possession who had successfully completed probation).

ii. Federal Law

• A conviction for an offense carrying a maximum punishment of more than one year in prison prohibits the person from possessing, shipping, receiving, or transporting a firearm or ammunition.  18 USC 922(g).
• If a person is has been placed on deferred adjudication or is still under indictment they are prohibited from acquiring firearms or ammunition.
• A person convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence is prohibited from possessing, shipping, receiving, or transporting a firearm.  18 USC 922(g)(9).

B. Driver’s License Restrictions

Graffiti	Discretionary one year suspension.
Racing (under 18 years of age)	Mandatory one year suspension
Theft of Motor Fuel	180 days for 1st offense;1 year for 2nd offense
Furnishing Alcohol to a Minor	180 days for 1st offense;1 year for 2nd offense
Possession of Fake I.D.; Allowing another to use one’s Driver’s License; Falsifying information on an application for a driver’s license; Using a driver’s license to represent one is over 21 when they are under 21	90 days – 1 year
Criminally Negligent Homicide (with a motor vehicle); Evading arrest; Intoxication assault; DWI with Child Passenger; Intoxication manslaughter; Any State Jail Felony offense with a motor vehicle involving personal injury or death	1 year suspension
Alcohol/Drugs and Minors: DWI, Minor (under 21); Purchase or attempt to purchase alcohol by minor; Drug offense under the Tex. Controlled Substance Act	1 year suspension (with exceptions);30 days – 1st offense; 60 days – 2nd offense; 180 days – 3rd offense; 180 days – 1 year
Drug offense under the Tex. Controlled Substance Act (adult)	180 days

C. Loss of Passport Privileges

• An issued passport may be revoked, even for misdemeanor drug offense, if the government finds that the criminal offense should give rise to such disqualifications.  22 USC 2714(b)(2).

D. Civil Rights

1. Voting: a convicted felon may not vote in a public election.  A conviction is considered final whether the sentence is imposed immediately or suspended (i.e. probation).   A convictions is not final if it is on appeal.  This ineligibility lasts until the offender has been “…fully discharged…or completed a period of probation ordered by the court.”  Tex. Election Code §11.002(4).

2. Public Office:  A convicted felon may not run for, or be appointed to, public elective office in Texas.  Probation counts as a conviction.  Except in limited circumstances (i.e. pardon), the offender is barred from life.

3. Jury Service:  A person convicted of, or currently charged with a misdemeanor theft may not serve on a jury.  This may apply to one serving a deferred adjudication.

E. Divorce/Child Custody

1. Evidence of abusive physical force against a spouse, child’s parent, or any person younger than 18 years of age and within two (2) years of a divorce being filed can be considered in regard to sole or joint conservatorship.  Tex. Family Code §153.004.

2. Evidence of a history or pattern of physical or sexual abuse may be considered by the court in awarding joint managing conservatorship (JMC).  A finding of such removes the presumption that the appointment of parents as JMC’s is in the best interest of the child.

3. The court may not allow access to a child if it is shown by a preponderance of evidence there is a history or pattern of family violence during the two (2) years preceding the date of filing the lawsuit.

4.   A conservator convicted or placed on deferred adjudication for:  indecency with a child; sexual assault, or aggravated sexual assault, is considered a material and substantial change of circumstances sufficient to justify a temporary order and modification of an existing order regarding conservatorship or possession and access to a child.  Tex. Family Code §156.104(a).

5.  A party may obtain a protective order if there are facts and circumstances of family violence.

F. Sex Offender Registration:  results in the imposition of significant restrictions and requirements, including losing your right to privacy in             electronic communication or data.

III. Immigration Consequences

if you are not a citizen of the United States you should consult an immigration attorney while your criminal case is pending.  Your criminal defense attorney may be able to refer you to a qualified immigration attorney.

1. Deportation/Removal

• You are not a U.S. citizen; AND
  • you commit a crime of moral turpitude;
    • with a punishment range of at least one year; AND
    • the crime is committed within five (5) years after admission to the United States or you commit two or more crimes that did not arise out of a single scheme of criminal misconduct any time after admission to the United States.

OR

• you commit an “aggravated felony”.
  • For an extensive list of what constitutes an aggravated felony see §101(a)(43) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).
    • Examples include such crimes as murder; rape; drug or firearms trafficking; sexual abuse of a minor; child pornography; money laundering; fraud; tax evasion greater than $10,000; theft or violent crime with a sentence order of a least one year; treason; perjury with a sentence of at least one year; etc.
  • See also §247 of the INA for additional deportable offenses.

• Under 101(a)(48)(A) of the INA the definition of a conviction includes deferred adjudication.

The importance of knowing these issues can not be understated.  Too often we receive phone calls from individuals unable to escape the cloud of previous mistakes.  Make sure you are under the guidance of a qualified attorney.  BE PREPARED.