Courts

August 1, 2013

Attorney Daniel Hilf’s Interpretation of the Larceny from Person Statute Prevails at the Michigan Supreme Court

On July 30. 2013 the Michigan Supreme Court decided the case of the People of the State of Michigan v. Chandra Valencia Smith Anthony (docket number 145371). The Michigan Supreme Court held that “Michigan law requires a taking from the person or immediate presence of a victim to satisfy the from-the-person element for the crime of larceny from the person. This standard is satisfied when the defendant takes property that is in the physical possession of a victim or property that is in immediate proximity to a victim when the taking occurs. Only in the rare larceny-from-the-person case in which the constructive-presence exception applies may a taking outside of a victim’s immediate presence satisfy the from- the-person element. The 2004 amendments to Michigan’s robbery statute did not change these established requirements.

In this case, there was no evidence that defendant took property that was in the physical possession of or immediate proximity to the loss-prevention officer, and there was no evidence that defendant used force or threats to distance the loss-prevention officer from the property at the time of the taking. As a result, there was insufficient evidence that defendant took property “from the person” of the loss-prevention officer. The Court of Appeals properly reversed defendant’s conviction, so we affirm the judgment of Court of Appeals”.

Attorney Daniel Hilf of Hilf & Hilf, PLC represented Chandra Valencia Smith Anthony during the original trial of this matter and Attorney John D. Roach served as her appellate counsel. The trial was conducted before the Honorable Michael Warren of the 6th Circuit Court in Oakland County (case number 2010-232465-FH).

May 6, 2013

Drug Addiction and Criminal Defense

by Hilf & Hilf, PLC

There are a variety of reasons individuals experiment or become addicted to drugs, such as: social history, genetic disposition, use by friends and/or family members, income level, how the individual handles stress, etc. A list from most addictive to least addictive substances include:

1) Heroin – the most addictive substance. Users often feel intense drug cravings and withdraw when denied this substance.

2) Crack Cocaine – crack is the most potent form of cocaine. Due to the fact that the high lasts approximately 15 minutes, it leads to repeated use which speeds up the onset of addiction.

April 25, 2013

Why you should not talk to the police.

by Hilf & Hilf, PLC

In most instances, talking to the police concerning a criminal accusation will not help the person being questioned and usually hurts them. Many people have an idea of a police officer or a detective as someone who has a balanced view, and will listen to both sides of the story fairly. The truth is, the reason the police probably is contacting a person is because they suspect that the individual has committed a crime or has material information as to a crime that has occurred, and they are trying to build a case. If the individual is in custody, this means that the police officer or detective believes that probable cause exists to arrest the person and that law enforcement is not on that person’s side. When the police have these beliefs they are clearly not balanced, and they are certainly not on the side of the person who they are investigating.

Police officers and detectives speak to individuals often to obtain a confession. A confession is desired because people who confess usually decide to plead guilty when the case is prosecuted, which results in less time, work, and expense for the police and the prosecution. People that confess also sometimes can be manipulated to assist the police on other matters (especially on drug cases) by using fear and promises of leniency to work against others who may be engaged in illicit activities.

The reasons persons sometimes choose to speak to law enforcement include: fear, intimidation, ignorance of the 5th Amendment privilege against self incrimination, arrogance (the person believes he or she is smart enough to talk himself or herself out of the situation), the hope for leniency, and/or the belief that since he or she is innocent of the allegation. The expression “the truth shall set you free” is often not true when it comes to criminal law, and more often than not the opposite of this expression is true. When the police want to speak with you about an alleged crime, you should immediately contact attorney Daniel Hilf of the law firm Hilf & Hilf, PLC.

March 18, 2013

Avvo Michigan Criminal Defense Lawyer

by Hilf & Hilf, PLC

Daniel Hilf, of the law firm of Hilf & Hilf, PLC is a frequent Avvo contributor, and has received awards from Avvo for his outstanding contributions as a criminal defense lawyer. He currently has an “superb” rating with Avvo (Avvo’s highest rating level). Mr. Hilf takes great pride in the large number of persons he has helped throughout his distinguished career to receive excellent results. Hilf & Hilf, PLC represents individuals in State and Federal Courts throughout the State of Michigan. We handle all felony, misdemeanor, local ordinance, and ticket matters.

Hilf & Hilf, PLC is conveniently located at 1775 W. Big Beaver Road in the city of Troy, Michigan. We can be reached Monday through Friday from 9:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. at (248)792-2590.

A listing of criminal cases that Hilf & Hilf, PLC handles include, but are not limited to the following:

March 13, 2013

7411 Status

by Hilf & Hilf, PLC

A person convicted of a drug possession offense in Michigan may qualify to have his or her record expunged at the time of sentencing.

In Michigan (for non federal cases) an individual who either pleads guilty or is found guilty of possession or use of a controlled substance, or possession or use of an imitation controlled substance for a second time, may be granted by the Court a special provision of the law called 7411 (also known as Michigan Compiled Law 333.7411) as long as he or she has not previously been convicted of a drug possession or delivery charge. Under 7411 status the Court without entering a judgment of guilt may defer proceedings and place the individual on probation. Probation would include the payment of fees and cost, and may (but does not have to) include conditions such as a jail sentence, drug/alcohol treatment, drug Court, drug/alcohol testing reporting to a probation officer and other standard terms and conditions of reporting or non-reporting probation. If the person successfully completes the terms and conditions of probation ordered by the Court, the Court shall discharge the individual and dismiss the proceedings without an adjudication of guilt. An individual in Michigan has only 1 opportunity in life for 7411 status. However, an individual charged with multiple drug charges as part of the same case (for example, a person charged with being in possession of marijuana and possession of cocaine at the same time) can receive 7411 status for all the drug offenses incurred at that time.

For any criminal offense, your best bet is to hire an experienced criminal defense lawyer, such as Attorney Daniel Hilf from the law firm of Hilf & Hilf, PLC.

February 20, 2013

Is it possible to be sentenced to a HYTA prison sentence and participate in the MDOC SAI Boot Camp for the same offense?

by Hilf & Hilf, PLC

In Michigan a Defendant sentenced under the Holmes Youthful Trainee Act (HYTA) is potentially subject to probation, probation with a jail sentence,or a prison sentence. If the Defendant is sentenced to prison under HYTA, he or she can be sentenced to a flat prison sentence of up to 3 years. The benefits of HYTA prison are that the offense becomes a nonpublic record, and the Defendant can truthfully tell employers, schools, and others that he or she does not have a felony conviction for the offense or offenses for which he or she received HYTA. Also, as a HYTA prisoner, the Defendant is not subject to the discretion of the parole board for release and is not subject to parole conditions or supervision upon release.

Unfortunately, a Defendant that receives HYTA prison is not eligible to participate in the MDOC SAI Boot Camp program. The basis for this is how the HYTA statute is written. The main benefit of the MDOC SAI Boot Camp is that if a Defendant is placed in this program, and successfully completes the program along with an aftercare component, he or she is placed on parole. The MDOC SAI Boot Camp program itself is 90 days long once the Defendant is placed in the program. There may be a delay for the Defendant to be placed in the program based upon the prison quarantine process and for MDOC compliance with the Michigan Crime Victim’s Rights Act. A benefit of a MDOC SAI Boot Camp sentence over HYTA prison is that the Defendant may end up serving far less time in prison under the MDOC SAI Boot Camp program depending upon his or her individual circumstances. Not all Defendants are eligible for the MDOC SAI Boot Camp program. Also, the sentencing Judge must have no objection to MDOC SAI Boot Camp placement.

For all criminal law issues it is important to retain the services of an experienced criminal defense lawyer, such as Daniel Hilf of the law firm of Hilf & Hilf, PLC.

January 25, 2013

Miranda Rights

by Hilf & Hilf, PLC

The typical Miranda Warnings read by a police officer when an individual is placed into custody include:

You have the right to remain silent;
Anything you say or do may be used against you in a Court of law;

November 11, 2012

What is ETG Testing

by Hilf & Hilf, PLC

EtG (Ethyl Glucuronide) is a common urine test used by Courts to verify whether an individual on bond or probation has used alcohol in the past 3 to 5 days. EtG testing is usually performed at an outside agency which the Court deems reliable (such as JAMS, NOVA, DOTS, etc.). It is favored in many Courts in lieu of a breathalyzer test based upon how far back it can detect alcohol. A breathalyzer test or a blood test may only be able to detect alcohol for hours based upon the body’s rapid elimination of alcohol from the body. Alcohol is eliminated from the body at a rate of approximately 1 drink per hour.

The EtG test is used to document abstinence from alcohol, to detect relapse, and to screen for drinking problems. Although the EtG test is deemed to be very reliable, there are instances of false positive tests due to a person’s exposure (as opposed to consumption) to alcohol through household cleaning and personal hygiene products. Incidental exposure to vanilla extract can also produce EtG concentrations in excess of 100 ng/ml. Testing that has occurred on cleaning, personal hygiene, and food products to determine incidental or unintentional exposure to alcohol has never produced a positive EtG level greater than 500 ng/ml, and this is sometimes used as a cut off level for Courts.

EtG can also be tested in hair and nails, with a window of detection of 3 months. The bleaching of hair and chlorine exposure may reduce or eliminate EtG presence in hair. However, EtG urine testing is far more commonly used by Courts.

November 10, 2012

Violation of Probation for Use of Drugs or Alcohol

by Hilf & Hilf, PLC

A very common violation of probation allegation in Michigan and elsewhere is for using or testing positive for drugs or alcohol while on probation. The punishment for drug or alcohol related violation of probation can include one or a combination of any of the following: no sanction; added conditions of probation such as increased drug/alcohol testing, drug treatment, AA/NA meeting attendance, community service, etc.; extending the term of probation; requiring Adult Treatment Court program participation (if the Court has an Adult Treatment Court program); incarceration of various lengths up to the maximum allowable sentence that can be imposed.

Judges differ in philosophy in terms of how they view a positive drug or alcohol test. Some Judges view a relapse, or relapses, as a part of recovery and may be willing to invest additional resources into the probationer to address the drug and/or alcohol problem. Other Judges have a no tolerance view of a positive drug or alcohol test, and want their reputation of strictness to deter a probationer, and others, from use. There are Judges that combine these philosophies and balance rehabilitation with punishment. A Court usually will eventually give up on a person who repeatedly violates their probation, and will usually choose to incarcerate the person.

There are circumstances in which a person will falsely test positive for drugs. A positive drug screen is often sent for additional analysis to confirm or negate the original test. Drug and alcohol testing is viewed as reliable by Courts, and it is often hard to overcome a positive test at a probation violation hearing. Reasons why someone might wrongfully test positive for drugs or alcohol include: the person tested positive for a valid prescription that he or she was taking; the person ingested a substance that could lead to a false positive such as poppy seeds, vanilla, or mouthwash; there was a human error regarding the testing procedures, etc. Any error in drug testing should be contested by an experienced criminal defense lawyer, such as Attorney Daniel Hilf.

September 7, 2012

Juvenile Court

by Hilf & Hilf, PLC

Persons younger than 17 years old accused of delinquency often have their matter addressed by the juvenile Court system. Delinquency charges in most cases are not considered as criminal matters, although the charges often stem from behavior that would be prosecuted under criminal law if the person was an adult at the time of the offense. The emphasis of the juvenile Court system is rehabilitation and treatment, rather than punishment.

At the conclusion of a police investigation a request is made of the prosecutor’s office to determine if probable cause exists to go forward with the intervention of the court system. If a probable cause determination is made, a petition is authorized to officially charge the juvenile and that petition is filed in most cases with the Family Division of the Circuit Court. In cases involving serious felony offenses, sometimes the juvenile is subject to being waived over or designated to the adult criminal system.

The first juvenile court proceeding is usually a preliminary hearing, which is similar to an arraignment. At this proceeding the juvenile is read the charge or charges and informed of his or her Constitutional rights. The matter of the amount of bond and any conditions of bond are also addressed at this hearing. If the juvenile is detained, he or she can ask for a probable cause hearing. For all juvenile Court proceedings, the juvenile has the right to legal representation. An experienced juvenile lawyer can be retained to work on behalf of a juvenile to try and obtain the best result possible through trial or otherwise, such as the lawyers at Hilf & Hilf, PLC.