Criminal Records, Expungement false charge listed - not the usual circumstance

[Mmurf]

when I say we I am referring to his lawyer. again, trying to save time typing.

 

[Zigner]

ive


I've seen all the complaints. I'm looking at them. the theft was of two non working jetskis and they were on one jetski trailer. they actually have 4 charges listed. the first count combines all three into one charge, the 2ns count has one jetski listed, 3rd count is the other jetski, and the 4th count is for the trailer.

he said he bought them as one package off an individual which is something we would have to prove in court.

I'm sure there is some type of law that prevents items from being listed twice on the same complaint.

What is the penal code he is charged with violating?

 

[Mmurf]

Right, intentional dishonesty (a lie).
It's easy for you - and I suspect it's just as easy for your BIL (it's easier to type that than either "brother in law" or "brother").

Right, intentional dishonesty (a lie).
It's easy for you - and I suspect it's just as easy for your BIL (it's easier to type that than either "brother in law" or "brother").

a time saving tactic that has no relevance to the question I'm asking.

 

[Mmurf]

What is the penal code he is charged with violating?

487(a)- count 1
496(a) - count 2 and 3 and 4

 

[Mmurf]

Because the statutes of limitation (generally) are tolled (paused) for a minor until they reach the age of majority (adulthood). Once he turned 18, any clock began running.

Oh good lawd - he HAS an attorney. Your [relative] can let HIS attorney know about the matter and his attorney can handle it. You really are further up in his business than need be.

again, had the attorney done his job correctly I wouldn't be here. lets stop with the back and forth and get back to the original question, please.

 

[Mmurf]

count 1 - 497a
2,3,4 - 496a

the same items, btw. same event.

 

[Mmurf]

Because the statutes of limitation (generally) are tolled (paused) for a minor until they reach the age of majority (adulthood). Once he turned 18, any clock began running.

Oh good lawd - he HAS an attorney. Your [relative] can let HIS attorney know about the matter and his attorney can handle it. You really are further up in his business than need be.

would that still be the same since he didn't get out of cya until he was 25?

 

[army judge]

Can we sue the county (and I know we can sue anybody anytime, so don't reply with that)? Also, how do we correct the error?

There is no WE.

If the defendants is male, there is only HE.

You can assist your relative by hiring a good criminal defense attorney to represent him.

As for the CYA case, you can speak with a few CA licensed criminal attorneys.

Again, only HE can bring a lawsuit.

However, I suggest you advise him to focus on the current criminal CHARGE, if he desires to remain among the free.

Fare well, citizen.

 

[Mmurf]

I was thinking it might be beneficial to clear up the mistake first to reduce enhancements I'm case he loses the current case.

 

[Mmurf]

you know, looking at the complaint it looks like the first charge is for stealing the property, while charges 2,3,4 are for receipt of stolen property. but the property is the same as I'm count 1. Can they do that? I read there were rules about charging two crimes for one event.

 

[army judge]

I was thinking it might be beneficial to clear up the mistake first to reduce enhancements I'm case he loses the current case.

The prior case might be untouchable.

Why?

Res judicata:

noun
1. The principle that a decision by a competent court in a case fully and fairly litigated is final and conclusive as to the claims and issues of the parties and cannot be relitigated.

2. A claim or issue that has been decided under this principle.

3. An issue that is before a court, has already been decided by another court, and that therefore must be dismissed by the current court.

Again, the best way to help him is to hire him a great, criminal defense attorney.

There is little, if anything anonymous entities (some of whom could be AI BOTS) while others (myself included) could be idiots, pranksters, or even undercovergovernmemt operatives.

 

[Zigner]

487(a) is Grand Theft and 497(a) has to do with larceny in another state. 487(a) is much more likely.

487(a)- count 1
496(a) - count 2 and 3 and 4

It would have been nice if you had mentioned the "Grand Theft" charge in the first place.

I'm done - there really is nothing this forum can do for you or your [relative].

 

[Mmurf]

my

487(a) is Grand Theft and 497(a) has to do with larceny in another state. 487(a) is much more likely.

It would have been nice if you had mentioned the "Grand Theft" charge in the first place.

I'm done - there really is nothing this forum can do for you or your [relative].

my mistake. it was 496(a) for counts 2,3,4

 

[Mmurf]

The prior case might be untouchable.

Why?

Res judicata:

noun
1. The principle that a decision by a competent court in a case fully and fairly litigated is final and conclusive as to the claims and issues of the parties and cannot be relitigated.

2. A claim or issue that has been decided under this principle.

3. An issue that is before a court, has already been decided by another court, and that therefore must be dismissed by the current court.

Again, the best way to help him is to hire him a great, criminal defense attorney.

There is little, if anything anonymous entities (some of whom could be AI BOTS) while others (myself included) could be idiots, pranksters, or even undercovergovernmemt operatives.

but what if the first court was wrong and we can now prove it. it was adjudicated, there was no jury.

 

[Mmurf]

there has to be some recourse in this situation. they can't expect a minor in cya to review his paperwork. there was no jury to catch the mistake, it was up to one judge. this should all count for something and if it doesn't I'd say try anyway and appeal it to a higher court to try to change the rules.

 

[Mmurf]

c

The prior case might be untouchable.

Why?

Res judicata:

noun
1. The principle that a decision by a competent court in a case fully and fairly litigated is final and conclusive as to the claims and issues of the parties and cannot be relitigated.

2. A claim or issue that has been decided under this principle.

3. An issue that is before a court, has already been decided by another court, and that therefore must be dismissed by the current court.

Again, the best way to help him is to hire him a great, criminal defense attorney.

There is little, if anything anonymous entities (some of whom could be AI BOTS) while others (myself included) could be idiots, pranksters, or even undercovergovernmemt operatives.

the case could be made that the judge/court wasn't competent as no competent court would make such an error.

 

[adjusterjack]

the case could be made that the judge/court wasn't competent as no competent court would make such an error.

That's what appeals are for and it's likely way too late for an appeal.

Sometimes the only advice we can give hiere is to consult an attorney.

Thread locked.