Typical Requirements for Expungement of Criminal Records

expungementOne of the main motivations for avoiding crime (or at least getting caught) is to keep from getting a criminal record. Even if an individual is merely arrested for a crime and not convicted, it goes on the record, and that can be a real drag especially if it is for a misdemeanor.

In the US, there are states that allow employers to ask about an applicant’s criminal conviction and arrests, and to run a background check to verify the information given. While in most states it is illegal for an employer to deny employment to an individual because of a criminal record, it can be very hard to prove that this was the deciding factor. In order to avoid the hassle, it may be a good idea to petition for expungement, which if successful will seal the criminal record and to all intents and purposes make it go away.

However, not all criminal records can be expunged. The requirements can be pretty stringent; convicted violent or sexual offenders can pretty much forget it, and so can habitual offenders. In most cases, a petition is best made with the assistance of an expungement attorney to make sure that all is in order.

Eligibility criteria are different from state to state, but typical requirements may include one or more of the following as applicable:

  • No incidents between petition and expungement
  • The crime is non-violent in nature
  • Sentence has been served
  • No pending proceedings
  • Charges were dropped or case was dismissed
  • Probation requirements were fulfilled satisfactorily

If you believe that you deserve to have your criminal record expunged, contact an expungement attorney in the state where your record was acquired as soon as possible. It may mean the start of a new life, and you may miss once-in-a-lifetime opportunities if you wait too long.

Recovering From A DUI Related Injury

Driving under the influence of alcohol is a serious crime in the United States, punishable by prison sentences and hefty fines, as well as a range of lesser punishments depending on the circumstances of the arrest. Furthermore, the consequences of a drunk driving conviction often extend far beyond the criminal penalties themselves, frequently causing individuals who have been DUI Incidentconvicted of this crime to encounter difficulties in pursuing work, housing, or loan financing. For these reasons, avoiding a DUI conviction is often critical for an individual’s long term well-being. Understanding how a DUI defense attorney can help those in this unfortunate position avoid conviction can help to improve an individual’s ability to respond to this situation.

When a person is initially stopped for driving while intoxicated, it is typically on the basis of a law enforcement official’s conclusion that there was probable cause to assume that the individual was engaged in committing an unlawful act. This can include almost any minor traffic offense, such as speeding, failing to signal when turning, and driving without a seatbelt, as well as an assumption of intoxicated driving. In order for the initial stop to be legitimate, the officer must be able to demonstrate that the assumption of probable cause was well-founded, usually by citing some driving behavior which prompted the stop. In the absence of this type of evidence, a drunk driving arrest may be considered unlawful.

If a law enforcement official determines that the individual is exhibiting signs of alcohol intoxication, they may be subjected to a field sobriety test. These tests typically involve the completion of tasks measuring motor skills and cognitive capacity, often in ways that are only marginally related to alcohol intoxication. The results of field sobriety tests can often be used to arrest an individual, but because of the tenuous relationship between field sobriety test results and alcohol intoxication, they often aren’t enough to result in a conviction.

The most important tool for law enforcement officials in proving that an individual was driving drunk is the use of chemical tests to determine intoxication. These tests, which include breathalyzer analysis and blood tests, are a highly objective measure of alcohol intoxication, and their results can be difficult to dispute in court. However, there are several strategies that can be used to help contest the results of a chemical test, including demonstrating that analysis devices have had calibration issues in the past or arguing that the test did not properly measure actual BAC levels because of extenuating factors.

In addition to the criminal penalties that those accused of DUI may face, their may also be civil suits lodged against those in this position if they were involved in an accident with another vehicle. Frequently, car accident lawyers who are aware of a driver’s potential conviction for DUI can help their clients to receive generous rewards in civil lawsuits by exploiting a jury’s animosity towards drunk drivers. For those who have been involved in an accident in addition to being accused of driving drunk, therefore, it is particularly critical that conviction be avoided at all means.

Overview On Recent Granuflo/ Dialysis Litigation

Undergoing any sort of medical treatment can be frightening and overwhelming. This is particularly true when person is experiencing something as potentially harmful and threatening as kidney failure. Fortunately, for anyone who has kidney failure or damage, there are a number of treatment options available. A kidney transplant is a less common choice as it is only needed for those with severe kidney damage or failure and can be both difficult and expensive to get. As such, many Kidney Dialysis Cellular Levelpeople with more serious kidney failure, disease, or damage will get dialysis in order to make sure their wellbeing and health is maintained as best as possible.

There are five different types of dialysis, three of which are primarily used. Through each of these forms, a person artificially has their blood filtered of harmful toxins, waste products, and excess products that build-up in their blood, which is the work that the kidney would ordinarily do. Of these three most common forms of dialysis, hemodialysis is the most commonly used treatment for patients with kidney failure. As such, many patients with kidney failure have dialysates, products that help filter the blood, put into their blood system. While many of these products are safe, recently a certain dialysate – GranuFlo – has found to be just the opposite.

Sadly, GranuFlo, which is designed to neutralize the harmful acids that build-up in a person’s body when their kidneys are not functioning properly by converting into bicarbonates, causes an excessive amount of bicarbonates to build-up in a person’s blood system. As a result of this excessive amount of bicarbonate, a person could find themselves facing a number of very serious health problems, including:

  • Heart arrhythmias
  • Strokes
  • Cardiac arrests
  • Low blood pressure
  • Metabolic alkalosis

Additionally, the patient’s family may be left seriously grieving if their loved one suddenly dies as a result of using GranuFlo.

Because of the very dangerous health problems that GranuFlo can cause, not to mention the risk of death, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration issued a Class 1 recall of the product in March of 2013. It was also discovered that Fresenius Medical Care, the manufacturer of GranuFlo, previously knew about the dangers GranuFlo presented when it was found that a memo was released warning of the problems this product could cause, but many members of the general public and medical profession were not made equally aware of these hazards. As a result, many victims and/or their families are taking legal action against the company and filing lawsuits to pursue justice and compensation for their losses and suffering.

Defending Against Accusations of Murder/Manslaughter

When a person is accused of murder or manslaughter, they face life-changing criminal penalties for the act of which they are accused. Even in the most beneficial of circumstances, a conviction for this type of crime carries heavy consequences that will dramatically impact the rest of that individual’s life in almost every area, from employment to personal relationships. As a result, those who are accused of murder or manslaughter necessarily must be able to do whatever they possibly can to avoid conviction for this type of crime.

The defense strategy for an individual accused of this type of crime will vary significantly, largely Injury From Criminal Actdependent on the specific facts of the case at hand, as well as several other relevant but tangential factors. However, in general terms, there are a range of strategies that a defense attorney may take in crafting a legal argument for his or her client’s innocence. The following is a brief examination of some of the most common of these strategies.

If the client is truly innocent of the act, their attorney has several options in shaping their defense. If the defendant has a reliable, verifiable alibi, this may be the crux of the defense. These types of defenses are typically rare, however, as a good alibi is often enough to prevent a case from going to trial in the first place. Therefore, this type of defense is often combined with a case built on discrediting or otherwise downplaying the validity of evidence marshaled by the prosecution. This is because criminal convictions in the United States must only be made in cases in which the evidence provided beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was guilty of the crime.

Interestingly, this standard differs from the standard required in civil cases. For this reason, those who are exonerated on murder or manslaughter charges in a criminal case may nevertheless still face legal action from the survivors of the deceased in the form of a wrongful death lawsuit. Many wrongful death lawyers understand how to build a convincing case that satisfies the preponderance of evidence requirement for civil cases, a standard which is much lower than the reasonable doubt requirement.

In cases in which the fact that the defendant’s actions resulted in the death of someone else is beyond dispute, there still remain several legal strategies for defending against a conviction for murder, manslaughter, or related charges. The most common of these strategies is the claim of self-defense. If the defendant can plausibly claim that his or her actions were necessary in order to defend themselves or others, it may be enough to result in a not guilty verdict, as self-defense is legally protected in many states, though the precise language governing self-defense statutes is critical to determining whether or not the particular case conforms to the law. Additionally, the defendant may claim insanity or the influence of intoxicating agents such as drugs or alcohol as causal factors in the crime, which in rare circumstances may be enough to render a not guilty verdict or a reduced judgment.

Assault Charges and Penalties

For public defenders, assault is one of the most common criminal charges with which clients may be charged. Legally speaking, assault has a much broader definition than the general public might expect: in order for someone to have committed an act of assault, it is not necessary for them to have engaged in any actual physical contact with their alleged victim. Instead, it is only necessary for law enforcement officials to be able to show that the individual committed an intentional act which created a reasonable fear of harm or unwanted contact in another person. If contact does, in fact, occur, the crime is often upgraded to assault and battery, though this may vary based on jurisdiction.

The penalties for assault crimes can vary significantly. If the intended harm suggested by the individual’s act went beyond the ordinary to suggest potentially serious bodily injury, the assault charge may be upgraded to aggravated assault, which often requires significant prison sentences and fines. Conversely, if the accusation of assault involved only a minor incident, the criminal penalties faced by the defendant may be correspondingly minor, potentially involving little more than community service and court costs.

In addition to the criminal penalties that an individual accused of assault may face, there is also the potential that they may be the subject of a civil lawsuit for the damages their actions are alleged to have caused. Assault, under the American legal system, is both a criminal action and a tort, meaning that those who are accused of committing assault can be subject to civil and criminal penalties. Many personal injury attorneys, understanding the potential for a positive judgment, will advise assault victims to pursue a lawsuit for this reason.

While the exact nature of the potential consequences that a person accused of committing assault can vary significantly, depending on a variety of different circumstances such as the details of the crime itself and the individual’s prior criminal history, avoiding conviction for this type of charge is Injury Abstractthe best outcome in most situations. An experienced criminal defense lawyer can help to mitigate the extent of the potential penalties, but even a conviction on reduced charges can have profound effects on the accused individual’s life, in the short and long term. Therefore, avoiding conviction altogether is the primary goal of most criminal defenders.

There are four main strategies that may be pursued in the goal of avoiding conviction for accusations of assault.  The first is simply a denial of the allegations: a lack of evidence, or evidence in favor of the defendant, can lead a jury to conclude that the alleged assault never occurred, resulting in a termination of criminal proceedings. However, if this is not possible, three main strategies can be effective in demonstrating that the individual did not break the law by committing assault. These can be defined as consent (in which case the “victim” consented to activity which they were aware might lead to their own injury), privilege (in which case the accused had some legal standing to commit an act which, in other circumstances, might constitute assault), and defense (in which case the act of assault was necessary to protect the accused individual or others).