According to the Chicago Tribune, the mayor wants new state laws on guns. He wants it to be harder for people to get guns and he wants criminals who use guns to receive harsher penalties. Although most of his suggestions were said to have failed in prior legislative sessions, Daley is asking the state to try again.

Among those changes his is recommending are background checks for all firearms sales (even private sales), a complete ban on assault weapons, a requirement that all gun dealers be licensed, and a limit on the number of handguns a person can purchase in a single month.

In addition he is asking the lawmakers to make it a Class 1 felony to knowingly sell a gun to a gang member, harsher penalties for unlawfully using a weapon, and “microstamping” of guns to make them more easily identifiable.

Daley and he proposed laws are not without critics, of course. Any law or regulation placed on firearms will be met with resistance simply because many believe their right to bear arms, as guaranteed by the 2^nd Amendment, should not be limited.

The fact is, however, until the Supreme Court rules otherwise, cities and states can regulate firearms how they wish, hence the vast number of laws currently on the books in Illinois and states across the country.

You may believe you were simply exercising your right to bear arms when you were arrested for a firearms offense. However, you may have well known that what you were doing was against the law.

Whatever the case, we can help. Whether you are facing charges of possession of a firearm, or any other weapons related offense, call our defense attorneys today. We can give you some free legal advice and help you gain clarity on a system that can be intimidating and quite confusing.

Nearly anyone you ask knows what the 2^nd Amendment is: it guarantees the right to bear arms. Previous Supreme Court decisions suggested this “right” only applied to the federal government, making it okay for states and cities to restrict guns. However, some argue that cities like Chicago should not be able to ban handguns completely.

When the Supreme Court ruled that D.C.’s handgun ban was unconstitutional, it didn’t expand those prior rulings stating that the 2^nd Amendment only applied to the federal government. The reason? Washington D.C. is a different sort of locale, governed by the federal government in a way that cities within the 50 states are not.

It was only a matter of time, then, that the Court would be asked to clarify the right to bear arms as it applies to such bans within states and cities across the country. The “McDonald” in McDonald v. City of Chicago is a concerned citizen who believes he should be able to keep a handgun in the home to protect his family and his property.

Currently, there are numerous laws in every state and city in the nation, controlling not only the weapons that we can and cannot own, but how we can use them and where we can take them. These laws were written with public safety in mind. This new court case stands to potentially define where public safety and the 2^nd Amendment intersect.

If you are charged with possession of a firearm, unlawful discharge, or any other weapons offense you may feel misjudged. As your attorney, it would be my job to represent your best interest in the courts, whether you are in Cook County or another jurisdiction.

If you need assistance with your gun case, call our attorneys today for a free consultation.

According to the Sun-Times, the fire was initially reported by Jefferson Park District Sergeant James Baul who happened to see a trash can in the alley ablaze. Upon a closer look, Baul found a broken out window and saw fire within the sanctuary. Once inside officials found Deichman sitting on some stairs.

At the scene Deichman apparently alluded to his responsibility for the fire and was described as being “manic”. He allegedly said he set the fire “because it was more economical.” The Sun-Times report states that church members had been concerned about Deichman in recent days and had even scheduled an intervention.

The fire consisted of a point of origin behind the church in an alley and within the church where firefighters found piles of items ablaze. It was a 3 alarm fire that required the work of 130 firefighters. The church is said to have been “heavily damaged”.

Arson is recognized as perhaps the most serious of all property crimes. The potential for casualties and serious loss of value may have something to do with why it is considered such a horrendous act under the law. The fact that this arson involved a place of worship only makes it worse for the defendant.

Although the Sun-Times report doesn’t clarify, Deichman is likely charged with aggravated arson, the most serious of arson charges. This offense is considered a Class X felony and carries a potential 30 year prison sentence.

While arson is the most serious of all property crimes, it is nowhere near as common as Criminal Damage of Property. We see this charge often in the Illinois criminal court system. It applies when you are accused of damaging the property of another without their consent.

Whether you are facing criminal damage or arson, your future is on the line. Contact me today for a consultation on your case and some free legal advice.

The BAIID program requires first time offenders that want to drive to install an ignition interlock device in their car. This device requires a breath test before allowing someone to start their vehicle. The law’s intention was to reduce drunk driving by DUI offenders.

As with any technology, the Ignition Interlock Devices aren’t 100% reliable. As this article from The State Journal Register explains, mouthwash can prevent a person from getting to work in the morning as the alcohol within it may read a false positive. In addition, there are reported incidences of the systems malfunctioning and freezing up.

The BAIID isn’t without costs. Offenders who opt for the program must pay all maintenance and installation fees, adding a greater bite to the fines they are already facing.

Because the Ignition Interlock Devices are optional, many people are choosing to not have them installed. An unfortunate reality is that many of these people are likely driving anyways. So the question remains, what good are they?

With 6,100 people having the devices installed in the past year, there is little doubt that they may be playing a small role in keeping DUI offenders from drinking. However, it would be unjustifiably optimistic to think that people aren’t finding a way around the system.

The BAIID law is just one way a DUI conviction can affect your life on a daily basis. Pair this inconvenience with jail time, fines, and a permanent criminal record and you are likely under a serious amount of stress when facing DUI charges.

Having a DUI defense attorney looking closely at your case and assisting you with your outcome can make a big difference. Contact me today to discuss how I might be able to help you get the best results possible when you go to court.

According to the Chicago Sun Times the bust was part of a nationwide investigation referred to as Project Coronado. It focused specifically on the distribution network of the cartel La Familia, based in Micoacan in southwestern Mexico.

The Chicago part of the bust happened largely in the suburbs and was centered in Berwyn, Bolingbrook, Oak Lawn, Hickory Hills, Joliet, and Justice. Fifteen suspects were arrested and charged with conspiracy to possess and distribute cocaine.

The Chicagoan suspects include 31 year old Jorge Luis Torres-Galvan, 37 year old Jose Gonzalez-Zavala, and 35 year old Ismael Flores, among others. Nationally, the sting resulted in more than 300 arrests in 19 states.

Distribution charges are serious whether you face them at the state or the federal level. Regardless of who brings the charges against you, you are likely looking at several years in prison and heavy fines. For instance, if you are caught with 15 grams of heroin or cocaine, you could face up to 30 years in prison.

The police don’t have to see you sell drugs to get distribution charges to stick, although it does help. If the state can come up with enough “probable cause” to believe that you even intended to distribute drugs, you could be facing these serious penalties.

Having an aggressive defense attorney on your side at times like these is crucial. As you face you’re a potential future behind bars, it’s no time to be second guessing your choice in representation.

Contact our Illinois defense lawyers today to discuss your case and the steps you should be taking. I am eager to hear the details and can offer some free advice.

Illinois law states that a protection order must be served (given to the accused) in order for it to be effective. The argument is that without a proper service, the supposed aggressor had no way of knowing they were to stay away from the alleged victim.

However, as this article from the Chicago Tribune reveals, without service, someone can’t be charged with violating a protection order.

According to the Tribune, Cook County exemplifies the rest of the state in that only about 20% of the protection orders issued by the courts are ever served.

These protection orders are most often issued in incidences of domestic violence. They are put in place to prevent further violence and to give victims a sense of security.

Without service, the restraining orders are useless. The police can serve a protection order at any time but tracking down the named aggressor isn’t always that easy. In addition, with police shortages and other things seeming to take priority, it seems the protection orders are not at the top of the “to do” list.

Victims advocate groups are calling for a change to this process as they worry what it would take for changes to happen otherwise.

While someone who hasn’t been served can’t be charged with violation of a protection order, others, who have been served can. If you are in violation of any term on a protection order, you can be immediately arrested and put in jail.

According to the law, judges are required to impose at least 24 hours in jail for your first violation of a protection order. Typically, that first offense is considered a Class A misdemeanor.

However, depending on the history of the case and your tendency towards violence with the victim, violation of a protection order can be considered a Class 4 felony charge, resulting in a potentially lengthy prison term.

If you have been served with a protection order and are now facing violation charges or if you are facing domestic violence charges, I may be able to help. Contact me today to discuss your case.

Last spring the Court of the land struck down a similar law in Washington D.C. but that ruling only applied to Federal laws. The difference with Chicago’s ban: it is a city law.

Because Washington D.C. is a different sort of legal entity, not being a state, the laws here are slightly different. While the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right to bear arms, the states and cities throughout the country can regulate that right.

The question that the U.S. Supreme Court must answer is does the city of Chicago have the right to restrict hand gun ownership to its citizens or does this go against what the Constitution guarantees in the 2^nd Amendment.

According to this article from the Chicago Sun-Times many people on both sides of the argument believe the law won’t last long and some even think the crime rate could go down if the law was overturned.

The current handgun ban results in many cases every year that wouldn’t happen if the ban was not in place. In addition, as the article points out, some citizens believe property crimes in the city may go down as would be offenders realize the person they steal from may have a weapon.

The argument exists that whether or not handguns are illegal, they are still out there. People still have them in their homes. The only difference is that with the ban in place, they cannot purchase them legally, leading some to trade on the black market, creating an underground of illegal weapons.

Gun laws are extensive with or without the handgun ban. There are many laws both at the state and local levels to regulate what weapons can be owned, how they can be carried, in what circumstances they can be used, and how they can legally change hands.

The opportunities for law violations when it comes to these sort of weapons are numerous. You could be charged with a relatively minor misdemeanor or a far more serious felony gun violation.

If you have found yourself on the wrong side of the law concerning a firearm you know just how stringent some of these laws can be. Whether you were caught in possession of a handgun within the city limits of Chicago or if you are charged with another weapons offense within the state of Illinois, I may be able to help.

Contact me today to discuss the details of your case.

State Attorney John Basanti came forward this week after previously questioning if the stings would be able to continue. A few departments didn’t want to be a part of the operation and that seemed to slow things down a bit.

According to this article from The Chronicle, it’s not clear which departments didn’t want to be a part of the stings, why, or if they reconsidered. What is clear is that some citizens feel the stings infringe on some of their rights.

The way the sting works is this: If you are pulled over and suspected of DUI a police officer may ask you to submit a breath test. If you refuse, the program has judges on call to potentially issue a warrant forcing you to submit.

Some are concerned these stings cost the state extra money and take police away from other crime fighting business that is more important. Even police chiefs and mayors are feeling the push to not participate in the program.

Typically, if you refuse a DUI and are later found guilty of the charge you can face additional penalties at sentencing. However, if a warrant was issued for your breath test and you still refuse, you can face additional criminal charges including obstruction of justice or resisting an officer.

Looking at the potential of jail time and fines that goes with a DUI conviction can be quite frightening. If this is your first DUI it is considered a Class A misdemeanor and carries fairly harsh sentencing penalties. If, however, you are looking at your second or third DUI conviction, the penalties are dramatically increased.

When up against charges like these, you need an experienced Illinois DUI attorney on your side. Contact me to discuss your case today.

Eighty-six year old Ella Orko is facing charges of shoplifting. She was reportedly caught trying to steal anti-wrinkle cream, salmon, coffee, and batteries from Dominicks. This latest arrest marks the 61^st for Ms. Orko.

According to this article from the Sun Times, Orko has had over 50 aliases in her life of small crimes.

For this particular charge, she originally faced a felony. Her attorney was able to work with the prosecution to get the charge reduced to a misdemeanor and she was sentenced to 2 day, which she had already served.

At the time of her arrest, Orko was not in a wheelchair, had no neck brace, and seemed to have good hearing. Judge Marvin P. Luckman stated “She’s an actress” in regards to Orko’s behavior in court.

Many people are repeat customers in the Illinois criminal courts. Typically, however, people learn their lesson before they’ve racked up 61 arrests like Ms. Orko.

Although she has been in front of the courts before, her plea agreement was likely worked out, in part, due to the low dollar value of the items she was accused of stealing.

Plea agreements are very common, being applied in nearly all criminal cases in our state. They are a win-win situation in most cases. If the prosecution has a good case against you, you and your attorney may agree that a plea bargain is a good idea.

Facing any criminal charges can be quite intimidating, particularly if this isn’t your first run in with the law. There is no doubt, repeat offenders are not afforded the same leniency as first time offenders.

If you are looking at criminal charges, you want to be certain to hire an experienced and aggressive lawyer to work on your behalf. Call me today for a consultation on your case.

How they work is when a person is arrested on suspicion of DUI in Illinois, a prosecutor is notified and immediately gets a motion to a judge on call to compel the production of evidence.

Then, typically blood is forcibly removed from the defendant shortly after the arrested, and tested for Blood Alcohol Content (BAC).

These tactics have been more commonly used in Texas, and are popular with those interested in extremely aggressive DUI prosecution tactics.

Defense lawyer, civil libertarians and many normal citizens are taken aback by this kind of overreaching government intrusion. The right of a citizen against self-incrimination is one of the cornerstones of the Bill of Rights.

Prosecutors say that it can be more difficult to get a conviction without breath test evidence establishing that a person is over the legal limit of .08% BAC.

But if a person must be forced to submit to these procedures for the government to get a conviction, exactly how dangerous could they be? If someone is seriously drunk and visibly impaired, and the police officers think the person is a great danger on the road, how is it that they can’t actually prove the person is intoxicated without this one piece of evidence? You would think the circumstances of the arrest, and the officers testimony would be more than enough proof for a jury to convict.

These “No Refusal” DUI deals are extreme, dangerous, and not necessary. It is nice to see that many police officers agree.

—

If you are accused of a DUI in Illinois, please contact us to get some free legal advice on your charges. We will offer our help and suggest how we may be able to beat your case in court.