|
Baron Porkface posted:Is a Mafia group/street gang said to have corporate property? Not sure in what sense you're asking. Under the Racketeer influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, if members of the organization use the proceeds of illegal activity to invest in or operate property or businesses, they can be made to forfeit either the property/business or their interest in the same, if not wholly owned by them.
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 16:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 15:14 |
|
|
joat mon posted:Not sure in what sense you're asking. Like if there's an investigation and the cop asks "who's gun is this" and they say "it belongs to the STREET SHARKZ as a whole."
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 16:51
|
|
|
Usually criminal laws care about possession, not ownership.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 17:04
|
|
|
Baron Porkface posted:Like if there's an investigation and the cop asks "who's gun is this" and they say "it belongs to the STREET SHARKZ as a whole." Probably not, and even if they could say that, what difference does it make?
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 18:34
|
|
|
"Officer, as you can see from the tag on the side of the suitcase full of cocaine, that belongs to the STREET SHARKZ. I'm a mere soverign citizen, as you can see here on my berth certificate."
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 18:50
|
|
|
EAT THE EGGS RICOLA posted:"Officer, as you can see from the tag on the side of the suitcase full of cocaine, that belongs to the STREET SHARKZ. I'm a mere soverign citizen, as you can see here on my berth certificate." It is clear that the STREET SHARKZ' gun and cocaine are mere bailments.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 19:48
|
|
|
As a foreign-flagged sea going vessel, this suitcase full of coke is a moral person registered in Liberia.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 23:21
|
|
|
Arcturas posted:Probably not, and even if they could say that, what difference does it make? Actually it does matter. It allows the DA to claim every gang member in the room possessed the gun and add a gang enhancement (which is generally more serious than the predicate offense). They do this all the time in CA, but they don't call it corporate property. As a gang, you don't want it to be the gangs gun.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 03:50
|
|
|
nm posted:Actually it does matter. It allows the DA to claim every gang member in the room possessed the gun and add a gang enhancement (which is generally more serious than the predicate offense). Ahahahaha. That's hilarious. I assume it's some sort of constructive possession?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 06:20
|
|
|
I have a few tenancy questions (and yes I have read my tenancy agreement). This is in New Zealand. Currently I'm co-tenant on the lease in a 3 bedroom townhouse and myself and the other tenant have been subletting the other room. Our tenancy agreement explicitly states that we're not to sublet but the landlord is aware that we are and is OK with it. I've come to realise that this is a dangerous situation for ourselves so now our current subletter is moving out in a couple weeks and I'm thinking the best idea would be to get written permission from the landlord to sublet the room? The other issue is that our tenancy agreement states we are to only have 3 occupants maximum. We're hoping to sublet the room to a couple because it'll bring our rent down a bit; would getting written permission from the landlord to do so supersede the tenancy agreement? Next, I've read through the relevant parts of the Residential Tenancy Act but I was wondering; we have a cookie-cutter subletting contract that we downloaded from the relevant government website and it states that the Residential Tenancy Act does not apply to subletters; is this pretty solid? I ask because our current flat mate is giving us all kinds of trouble about moving out and our contract with her states that we can give 14 days notice for her to move out without reason, though I hope that it does not come to that. Finally, I'm not sure this is an issue or not but is there any problem with charging a higher rent for subletting? For example say we were charged $300 a week as our total rent, divided between the three of us equally. If we found new subletters who would pay an advertised rent of $150 a week for the room, thus reducing our rent by $25 each, is there any legal problem with this? Are we legally obligated to disclose the total rent for the property to a potential subletter? Sorry if this is a little niche, being NZ and all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 06:21
|
|
|
Arcturas posted:Ahahahaha. That's hilarious. I assume it's some sort of constructive possession? Yeah. There is a case where the California Supreme Court called bullshit finally. Dude was in a motel room with some other gang member. Gun was under the bed of other gang member. There was no evidence that the dude knew the gun was there. They "gang expert" testified that it was "a gang gun" and therefore, if he'd just asked for it (remember, no proof he knew it was there), he would have gotten it. Supreme Court overturned that conviction (after the guy rotted in prison for a couple years of course).
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 07:56
|
|
|
nm posted:They "gang expert" testified that it was "a gang gun" and therefore, if he'd just asked for it (remember, no proof he knew it was there), he would have gotten it. I know the answer to this question is just going to be even more depressing, but what are the usual qualifications for being a "gang expert"?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 08:08
|
|
|
Thuryl posted:I know the answer to this question is just going to be even more depressing, but what are the usual qualifications for being a "gang expert"? Be a total white collar nerd with 100 years of secondary education who has never even seen someone from a gang except if they're behind bars would be my guess. But IANAL. :P
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 14:27
|
|
|
Wow I didn't even know there was a whole developed line of gang property law. loving California.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 15:16
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Wow I didn't even know there was a whole developed line of gang property law. loving California. 'Joint enterprise' isn't a unique thing to California, it's fairly widespread in some form or another.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 15:42
|
|
|
Thuryl posted:I know the answer to this question is just going to be even more depressing, but what are the usual qualifications for being a "gang expert"? Be a cop who attended a 3 1/2 day class in how to write down the names of all the young black and Hispanic males you encounter while on patrol. After all, one's lack of actual expertise only goes to the weight (which a jury will disregard), not the admissibility of the testimony.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 17:20
|
|
|
jassi007 posted:Be a total white collar nerd with 100 years of secondary education who has never even seen someone from a gang except if they're behind bars would be my guess. But IANAL. :P There are a lot of creative ways law enforcement goes after gangs because there is difficulty pursuing more traditional criminal law routes. Specifically one way involves the use of civil injunctions to enjoin a gang's activity and is aimed at areas where the gang congregates. When I was doing my internships in law school, an attorney was killed because he went (alone, stupidly) to visit a site of a potential injunction when a gang member shot him. I can guarantee you the attorneys and police who work gangs are not white collar, feet on the desk type of people.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 19:34
|
|
|
xxEightxx posted:There are a lot of creative ways law enforcement goes after gangs because there is difficulty pursuing more traditional criminal law routes. Specifically one way involves the use of civil injunctions to enjoin a gang's activity and is aimed at areas where the gang congregates. When I was doing my internships in law school, an attorney was killed because he went (alone, stupidly) to visit a site of a potential injunction when a gang member shot him. I can guarantee you the attorneys and police who work gangs are not white collar, feet on the desk type of people. The injunctions are actually really interesting, since they have to walk a fine line with First Amendment problems. I think it's pretty often that a district court judge will say "First Amendment? Too bad - you're in a dangerous gang!", but I've seen a little pushback recently. For instance, the Utah Trece Gang injunctions up in Logan was overturned by our Supreme Court last fall, though only on a narrower procedural basis.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 19:47
|
|
|
I've heard of similar injunctions being given out as a condition of probation or parole, but a civil injunction against a gang, as opposed to specific members, seems like it would be really hard to enforce.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 23:21
|
|
|
Konstantin posted:I've heard of similar injunctions being given out as a condition of probation or parole, but a civil injunction against a gang, as opposed to specific members, seems like it would be really hard to enforce. Quite the opposite. The injunctions typically come under fire for giving police too much authority, since it can prohibit some really basic things like the color of clothes you wear, etc.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 23:53
|
|
|
I was going to ask about that. If injunctions can be created against gang activity, what stops them from being used for activity which is itself legal when done by, say, politically dissentious groups? As much as it pains me to say it, I'd hate to see the rights of assembly and speech restricted for some groups (even gangs and the WBC) since it seems it would set a dangerous precedent. To my lay eyes, the burden of proof in civil matters usually seems to be not that rigorous and especially not rigorous compared to criminal matters; is the burden to get a civil injunction similarly weak? If so, that's pretty loving scary. E: And what happens when you violate a civil injunction? Jailtime for contempt?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 01:56
|
|
|
First amendment forbids prior restraint of speech or expression. Criminal activity is not protected speech.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 02:10
|
|
|
That's the short version and why the injunctions are legal, but it gets messy at the edges. Nancy, if you're curious go look up the Ogden Trece Gang case and associated literature - the briefing at the Utah Supreme Court is probably public somewhere and will give you a flavor of the arguments.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 02:28
|
|
|
The Utah chapter of the ACLU has their filings and the court order online: http://www.acluutah.org/legal-work/current-cases/item/333-weber-co-v-ogden-trece/333-weber-co-v-ogden-trece
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 03:27
|
|
|
Thuryl posted:I know the answer to this question is just going to be even more depressing, but what are the usual qualifications for being a "gang expert"? Be a cop who knows what MS-13 means. Seriously, they're a joke.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 04:05
|
|
|
In US criminal cases, is the defendant allowed to refuse a jury trial and ask for a judge to decide the case alone?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 04:08
|
|
|
Yes. ( The AG and Court also must consent if the defendant waives a jury.) euphronius fucked around with this message at 04:35 on Feb 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 04:29
|
|
|
My dad is having some issues concerning a "tenant" that he would like to get rid of, and I quote that for reasons to be explained, and I'd like some advice so I can help him get rid of said tenant. 1. He lives in Carlsbad, California 2. He took her in and allowed her to stay there as a favor to a friend. 3. She is not his girlfriend or anything close to that. 4. She doesn't and has not ever paid rent. Nor does she really do anything around the house. She is pretty much leeching off of him at this point. 5. She has caused disturbances with my father in the past. 6. She has been at his place for 9-10 months now. 7. He told me that he has recently asked her to leave, but she refuses to do so. He has also tried to help her find another place to go, but she refuses. Edit: He owns the house that they are in. No legal actions have been taken yet, but I want to get all the facts straight before I tell him what he can do to get rid of this lady. Other people, including myself, can vouch for her bad behavior. Kuros fucked around with this message at 07:01 on Feb 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 04:45
|
|
|
Has your dad considered that his "docking" with her "berthing station" is probably going to make him responsible for their "white whale"
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 05:26
|
|
|
Also, some questions: 1) why are you saying "myself" instead of "me"? 2) Have you considered that maybe they're in love? 3) Is she a sea captain/ghost? That would explain the disturbances. (he should find somewhere else to live)
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 05:31
|
|
|
EAT THE EGGS RICOLA posted:Has your dad considered that his "docking" with her "berthing station" is probably going to make him responsible for their "white whale" They have never had sex if that's what you are implying. EAT THE EGGS RICOLA posted:Also, some questions: It's his house that he owns.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 07:00
|
|
|
Kuros posted:It's his house that he owns. Then he can just throw her out and her stuff. She's a lodger not a tenant and has no right to stay. e: oops, forget this because \/\/\/ Alchenar fucked around with this message at 10:31 on Feb 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 10:09
|
|
|
Yeah, that's not true in California. Generally, lodgers have the same rights as tenants. If she's a lodger, then the dad may not need to formally evict her, but he probably will still have to give her written notice in advance of the given move-out date.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 10:26
|
|
|
ibntumart posted:Yeah, that's not true in California. Generally, lodgers have the same rights as tenants. If she's a lodger, then the dad may not need to formally evict her, but he probably will still have to give her written notice in advance of the given move-out date. I've been reading, but I'm not sure if it would be a 3 day or would it be a 30 day?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 15:43
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Yes. Out of curiosity, are there scenarios where doing this would make sense for a defendant? With a jury you typically need just one juror to vote your way, but when it's just a judge it's all or nothing. Without any other considerations, the math would indicate that's a bad idea.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 21:34
|
|
|
dvgrhl posted:Out of curiosity, are there scenarios where doing this would make sense for a defendant? With a jury you typically need just one juror to vote your way, but when it's just a judge it's all or nothing. Without any other considerations, the math would indicate that's a bad idea. How much do you look like a skinhead? How much does your legal defense depend on a technicality that will make the jury angry? How complicated is your defense, compared to how simple is it for the prosecution to prove their case? Are you in front of a judge who's notoriously pro-defendant (hahahahaha, these judges don't exist)? Are you a black defendant in the bad parts of the South? (this one just means you're screwed on both options, but...)
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 21:53
|
|
|
Starting a small business. What kind of lawyer / lawyerly services do I need? Aside from tax and accounting things - I'm more interested in insurance and intellectual property.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2014 02:39
|
|
|
frenchnewwave posted:Starting a small business. What kind of lawyer / lawyerly services do I need? Aside from tax and accounting things - I'm more interested in insurance and intellectual property. Depends on the business. More details would be useful. Generally speaking, I can't give you any advice on insurance (because I know nothing about it), but IP-wise, things to consider: Trademark: depending on your funding and the type/scope of the business (i.e., is it a local pizzeria or a country-wide internet company) it may be worth considering having someone check for trademarks that might read against your chosen name and file an intent-to-use application. Trademark is mostly its own little specialty, so you want someone who specializes in trademark law if possible. If you don't know of anyone, INTA (INternational Trademark Association) may offer referrals. Copyright: If you do creative work or software, copyright will be relevant, but you probably don't need a lawyer on retainer up front. If you have a single piece of material that's critical, you might want to register it, but that's a cheap/easy process that doesn't necessarily need a lawyer. Patent: If you have something patentable (either a technology or an ornamental design), consider patenting it. It's not necessarily cheap, but it's not usually unreasonably expensive to obtain a patent either (can go anywhere from 10k-100k, more if you're in pharmaceuticals or other fields where you may need experimental evidence). Also, if nothing else you can always try to sell it to a troll when your company dies and recoup some of your money (and make sure I stay employed when the troll sues one of my clients.) You'll want a lawyer who is licensed to practice in front of the Patent and Trademark Office - other lawyers cannot prosecute a patent for you.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2014 03:29
|
|
|
My mother passed away this week and the family is flying out to try and settle her estate. We are pretty sure she didn't have a will. She was renting a home, has a fair amount of furniture/antiques but the bulk of her money is likely in retirement accounts. There are 4 kids, she was divorced, and our cursory understanding of Texas law is that it means that myself and my siblings will split everything evenly amongst ourselves. No one has issues with that. She lived in Texas and the rest of the family lives in California. My grandma/her mom is in hospice care and isn't expected to live much longer. My mom had POA over her health and was going to be the trustee of my grandma's assets when she passed. I imagine that's going to cause us a lot of headaches. We are in the process of finding an estate attorney to assist us but I don't know what questions I should be asking. Any advice here? The one question none of us are sure about is are we allowed to touch her belongings without a will? The house is a rental through the end of the month and since none of us live out there we were planning on taking the personal items and likely donating the larger items. Is that legal? Or do we need to store everything until this situation is under control with the help of a lawyer?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2014 20:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 15:14 |
|
|
You need a lawyer in the town she passed away in. You are asking for pretty specific legal advice there. The lawyer will be paid from your mom's estate.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2014 20:28
|
|