About Rachel Perez

Posts by Rachel Perez:

Texas Bail Reform

Texas Bail Reform

0

HB 3011 is a bail reform bill filed in the Texas Legislature filed by Representative Andrew Murr of District 53 (comprised of several counties in the Kerrville area), and in the senate,  SB 1338,  by Senator John Whitmire of Houston.  “The [Texas] Judicial Council recommends that this be standard practice throughout the state,” Hecht said. “Liberty and common sense demand this reform.”  Click Here to Learn More

This legislation would modernize Texas bail law and improve the lives of thousands across the state who find themselves sitting in a jail cell. The bill would implement a risk-based bail system, which would result in using jails only for those who present genuine public safety risks while releasing the vast majority of people on personal recognizance (PR) bonds.

Currently, if you are arrested in Texas today, you will almost certainly be required to pay money to get out of jail.  For most people who cannot pay the entire amount of the bail set, the only viable way to get out of jail is by making a non-refundable payment to a bondsman.

The use of PR bonds, based on a validated risk assessment, is what the bail bill would implement.  There are a tremendous amount of people arrested who are low-level and low-risk, and should be promptly released on a PR bond.   Terry W. Yates says, “Money not spent with a bondsman can then be used to for defendants to hire the attorney of their choice.”

This is a win-win situation for the taxpayer and the accused citizen. It will save the taxpayers money by not housing people in jail as well as not having to pay for court appointed attorneys for incarcerated defendants. Defendants will be quickly released so they can return to their families and employers.

There will no doubt be a pushback from some people in law enforcement and the bail bond lobby. Hopefully, some version of this bill will pass so that the antiquated Texas Bail system will be modernized.

COACH BRILES FOLDS HIS HAND

0

Former Baylor football coach Art Briles sued three school regents and a vice president for libel and slander on after he was fired by Baylor University. Briles accused them of falsely stating that he knew of the reported sexual assaults and alleged gang rapes by his former players and failed to report them to authorities. Click Here to Read More.

Briles dropped his libel lawsuit against school officials just days after new allegations surfaced claiming that as many as 31 football players committed 52 acts of rape between 2011 and 2014. Click Here to Find Out More. 

This new lawsuit brings forth additional sexual assault allegations that add fuel to critics that lambasted Briles for turning a blind eye to his player’s criminal behavior.

Briles’ attorney Ernest Cannon admitted that the lawsuit was about Briles trying to recapture his good name. Terry W. Yates predicted that this was the motivation behind the lawsuit when he discussed this matter with Granato & Raheel with Del on ESPN Radio 97.5.

Yates adds, “The risk is just too great for Briles to pursue this lawsuit. With these new allegations, he is going to be playing defense again.”

Robert Rhodes Plea of Guilty

0

Our client Robert Rhodes entered a guilty plea in Des Moines, Iowa yesterday. Click Here to Read More “Robert will continue to assist all of the prosecutors in their respective investigations in order to see that justice is finally done”, says his attorney, Terry W. Yates. Click Here to Find Out More

We have an agreement with the Attorney General in Wisconsin. At a date in the near future, we will be traveling to Madison to enter another guilty plea. Click Here to Learn More

“Mr. Rhodes is thankful for all of the support he has received from his family and friends throughout this difficult time.  He is ready to start a new chapter in his life”, remarks Yates. To Learn More Click Here 

Lawsuits for Malicious Prosecution

0

An action for malicious prosecution is the remedy for the baseless and malicious litigation of criminal charges. It may be brought in response to any baseless and malicious litigation, whether criminal or civil.

The wrongly accused criminal defendant or civil respondent in a baseless and malicious case may later file this claim in civil court against the parties who took an active role in initiating or encouraging the criminal filing. The defendant in the criminal case becomes the plaintiff in the malicious prosecution suit, and the plaintiff or prosecutor in the original case becomes the defendant. In Texas, the claim must be filed within a year after the end of the original case, which must end in the defendant’s favor. This means the criminal prosecution must result in a dismissal, no-bill or not guilty verdict.

A claim of malicious prosecution is a tort action brought in civil court to recover money damages for the harm suffered from the malicious claim. The plaintiff in a malicious prosecution suit seeks to recover money from the respondent for the various costs associated with having to defend against the baseless and vexatious case.  The damages may include the cost of making a bond, attorney fees, and economic harm from being wrongfully incarcerated. The plaintiff may also recover money for the emotional distress associated with being jailed.

Often times, slander and libel claims are brought in conjunction with the claim for malicious prosecution. The plaintiff may be able to recover money for the damage done to his or her reputation in the community.

The public policy that supports the action for malicious prosecution is the discouragement of frivolous claims. This policy must compete against one that favors the freedom of law enforcement officers, judicial officers, and private citizens to report and participate in the administration of the criminal justice system.

The Yates law offices have been very successful in prosecuting claims for clients who have been wrongfully charged with criminal conduct. We have sued and recovered monies for our clients from several different corporations and individuals who have wrongly accused our clients of criminal conduct. Click here to read the Story

Terry W. Yates also testifies as an expert witness in cases involving these types of lawsuits. Like this one Click here to Read the Story

Coach Briles’ Lawsuit Isn’t Really About Money

0

Former Baylor head football coach Art Briles recently sued three school regents and a vice president for libel and slander. He accuses them of falsely stating that he knew of reported sexual assaults and alleged gang rapes by his former players and failed to report them to authorities.

The lawsuit, which names board of regents Ronald Murff,  J. Cary Gray and David Harper, and senior vice president Reagan Ramsower, seeks unspecified damages in excess of $1 million. Click here to read the story

Briles claims that the three named Baylor regents conspired to damage his reputation and keep him from getting another coaching job. Click here to read the story

Because Briles is a public figure he will have to meet the arduous “actual malice standard” set by the U.S. Supreme Court in order to prevail at trial. The actual malice standard will require him to prove, not only that the statements were false, but the Baylor regents knew that the statements were false when they were made;, or that the regents acted in reckless disregard of the statements truth or falsity.

Claims by public figures such as these very rarely prevail in court, and should this one go to court it is very likely Coach Briles will lose. Terry W. Yates says, “this lawsuit isn’t about the money.  Briles is betting that the defendants will not want to litigate this ugly mess and that they will agree to settle out of court.”

Any settlement will remain confidential, and simply be reported to the public as settled for an “undisclosed amount of money”. “That would be the case even if Briles settles for $1,” Yates says. “All Coach Briles really wants to be able to say, and have a settlement to add credence to his argument, that he was a scapegoat for the Baylor mess. His end hope is that a settlement would give another university president a basis to hire him as their next football coach.

 

CHANGES COMING FOR THE HARRIS COUNTY BOND SYSTEM

CHANGES COMING FOR THE HARRIS COUNTY BOND SYSTEM

, , 0

The Harris County bail system continues to grab national headlines with a recent Associated Press article. (Read Here) 

Last October brought a rally in downtown Houston that attracted over 200 people seeking bail reform.  There is growing frustration over the bail schedule in Harris County and the reliance on cash bonds.   County officials are implementing several new strategies to streamline cases, conduct better pretrial risk assessments, and provide counsel to people at bail hearings.  Some of these measures are funded under the county’s MacArthur grant.  These new processes will provide some relief to poor people who cannot afford to make bail.   However, people with the money to bail out will still be released a few hours after arrest.

Houston Criminal Defense Attorney, Terry W. Yates says, “Accused citizens who can make bail are in a much superior position to defend themselves against the pending charges.  They are able to earn money, more efficiently assist their attorneys and keep their personal affairs in order.”  People on bond are treated very differently by prosecutors, judges, and even juries.  “Defendants who fight their case from the Harris County Jail are up against so many factors that it is almost impossible to get justice”, says Yates.

According to Yates, one of the most oppressive features of the bond system in Harris County is the ‘high bond’ requests prosecutors obtain in white collar cases.   “We had a client that was arrested on a $700,000.00 bond a couple of years ago in a white collar case.   He was acquitted of the charges last Friday.   Had a bond not been made, an innocent man would have sat in jail for over 2 years”, Yates added.

Changes may be on the horizon on a statewide basis.   The Texas Judicial Council, chaired by Supreme Court Chief Justice Nathan Hecht, recently voted to accept the resolution and recommendations of the Council’s Criminal Justice Committee.  The Judicial Council will craft statutory language for the legislature’s consideration in the upcoming session based on these recommendations.  The bail insurance industry has seen this coming, and their representatives are already coming to Texas from their out-of-state offices in Indiana to lobby our legislators.

Texas DWI Sentences

Texas DWI Sentences

, , , , , , , 0

While first time DWI defendants are receiving some leniency by counties that have implemented pretrial diversion or divert programs that can keep a person from having a final conviction, sentences for people who injure or kill others seem to be getting more severe.   Also, juries and judges are handing down harsh sentences for people with multiple convictions.

Recently, a Texas man received six life-sentences following his sixth DWI arrest. This incident resulted in a crash when he was pulling into a liquor store. Two people were killed in the wreck and a third person received life-threatening injuries, the Houston Chronicle reported about the incident in late September. In another case in Montgomery County, a man received a life sentence this summer for his ninth DWI conviction, Montgomery County Police Reporter’s Scott Engle wrote.

In another case, a Hays County jury handed down the 99-year sentence to San Marcos, Texas, resident Jose Marin following his 8th conviction for driving under the influence. Assistant District Attorney Jennifer Stalbaum said the sentence was the only way to prevent Marin from ever driving drunk again, the San Antonio Express-News reported last week.

Today, Terry W. Yates was interviewed by Dale Forbis on News Radio 740 KTRH, and spoke about these issues.   With the usage of body and police cameras, officers do not have as much discretion as they did in the old days.  If you are stopped for suspicion of DWI today you are likely going directly to jail, Yates said.  The better practice is simply not to drink and drive.

Texas Airports and Handguns

Texas Airports and Handguns

0

Philadelphia Eagles linebacker Nigel Bradham was recently arrested and charged over the weekend after an incident at Miami International Airport. Click Here to Read the Story

Click Here to Read the Story

Bradham was stopped at the airport after the TSA noticed that he had a loaded gun in his backpack.  He was arrested and charged with carrying a concealed weapon at the Miami Airport.   The offense is a misdemeanor in Florida.

The Eagles linebacker, who has a permit to carry a concealed weapon, told TSA agents that he made an honest mistake and simply forgot that there was a gun in his bag.

For people who travel often and who have a license to carry, this is not an uncommon occurrence.   Individuals who are licensed to carry get so used to carrying a gun that they forget to remove it before going through airport security.   Our office has represented several individuals who have been through this exact scenario.

Had Bradham been in Texas there might have been a different outcome.    There is good news for individuals in Texas who would be otherwise be facing the felony charge of Unlawful Carry of a Weapon in a Prohibited Place, namely, an airport. The Texas Legislature recently created an exception to the law that applies to CHL holders.

Section 46.03 of The Texas Penal Code was amended to allow the CHL holder possessing a handgun in an airport to leave the secured area.  With the change in the law, instead of placing someone under arrest, the authorities simply allow the person to leave the secured area in order to return the firearm to their vehicle or secure it in some other lawful manner.

Practically, it still is not a good idea to take your handgun to the airport; however, if you are licensed, there is a good chance you might avoid a trip to the jailhouse.

Update on Jairus Warren Charge

0

Yesterday a Harris County grand jury handed down an indictment against our client, former METRO Police Officer, Jairus Warren.  The grand jury charged him with assaulting Darrel Giles, a class A misdemeanor. Click Here to Read the Story Click Here to Read the Story

 

Shortly after the encounter with our client, Darrel Giles was arrested and charged with assaulting HPD Sgt. Bohn, by biting a chunk out of his arm.  While numerous media outlets allege that Mr. Giles is homeless, he is currently residing at the Harris County Jail.

 

“While we are disappointed with the grand jury’s finding, we look forward to presenting Mr. Warren’s case to a Harris County jury,” says Mr. Warren’s attorney, Terry W. Yates.

 

Mr. Warren resigned his position at METRO on Monday due to the fact that it was apparent that the administration had already made a decision to fire him before the matter was fully investigated.  Mr. Warren will turn himself into authorities once the charge is filed with the Harris County District Clerk’s Office.

Your Miranda Rights in Your Home

Your Miranda Rights in Your Home

, , , , , 0

Another judge has weighed in on the issue of whether a suspect is due his Miranda warnings when the police execute a search warrant in an aggressive manner in the suspect’s home.  The judge, like an increasing number of judges around the country, found that Miranda warnings are, indeed, required when the police use a tactic to execute a search warrant which can be described as shock and awe.  In United States v. Freeman the police executed a search warrant at the home of Ralph Freeman who was suspected of possessing child pornography.  The judge described the scene as follows:

The officers’ 6:00 a.m. entry was loud and harrowing for any reasonable person who was inside that home. Within seconds of waking up, Freeman immediately faced several armed officers wearing tactical bulletproof vests rushing up the stairs. Their handguns were drawn and equipped high-powered LED lights, which are powerful enough to disorient or momentarily blind an individual. One officer even used his handgun to knock a napkin out of his hand. From that initial encounter until the moment Freeman left the home, he was under the supervision and control of at least one, if not two, officers at all times. Freeman was separated from his family at all times, and the HSI Agents secretly recorded his interrogation in a closed second-floor bedroom. … Freeman’s house was swarming with federal and state agents, he was rousted from bed at gunpoint, held … and not allowed to move unless guarded, and ultimately separated from his family and placed in [an upstairs bedroom] with two agents where he was questioned.

The judge in Freeman found that under these circumstances – circumstances which are becoming increasingly common as law enforcement across America has adopted this shock and awe method – a reasonable person in Freeman’s position would not have felt free to leave.  As a result, he was effectively in custody and was entitled to be informed of his Miranda rights.

If you encountered a similar situation, contact us to discuss about what possible remedies you have. Call 713-861-3100 or email us.

Load More