#rockind

New Post has been published on http://www.rockindlaw.com/identity-crisis-the-state-denies-it-is-the-government-or-the-state/

Identity Crisis: The State Denies It Is The Government Or The State

We know who the government is, right?  If you work for a city, county, state or the federal system, you are a part of the government.  Seems simple enough.  And while there are different levels of government, e.g., state or federal, they are most assuredly the government.  Only the government can prosecute citizens for crimes and seek their conviction and incarceration.  So, it’s pretty obvious to who is who … 

Yet recently, a prosecutor took exception to our characterizing the entity prosecuting our client as “the State” or “the government.”  The prosecutor literally typed that they didn’t like being called “the State” or “the government.”  

What?!!!!

Don’t believe me, read it yourself:

Talk about self-loathing. If you prosecute people, you are the State or the government. Period.  

Instead, the prosecutor wanted to cling to a “we are we people” fiction.  Sorry, when cases end up in the federal system or in the US Supreme Court, they are characterized by the “State versus….” and the positions taken by the prosecutors are characterized as “the State argues…”.  

New Post has been published on http://www.rockindlaw.com/police-officials-throughout-oakland-have-mixed-feelings-about-body-cameras-for-officers-press-the-oakland-press/

Police officials throughout Oakland have mixed feelings about body cameras for officers (Press -The Oakland Press)

Police officials throughout Oakland have mixed feelings about body cameras for officers By: John Turk

FILE – In this Jan. 15, 2014 file photo a Los Angeles Police officer wears an on-body camera during a demonstration in Los Angeles. An agreement with Boston’s largest police union to have 100 officers wear body cameras was praised as a step toward greater accountability. But with the Sept. 1, 2016, rollout date for the pilot program approaching, not a single officer had volunteered to wear one. (AP Photo/Damian Dovarganes, File)

Oakland County Sheriff Michael Bouchard remembers a time as a patrol officer in which he responded to a very private police call.

“A woman had slipped getting out of the shower, and was stuck between a bathtub and the toilet, naked,” he said.

“Had I been wearing a body camera, that would’ve been immediately FOIA-able.”

Privacy for Oakland County residents is only one of the issues why the county’s sheriff believes that if officers wear body cams, there needs to be a policy in place.

While police shootings and other incidents across the country spark the discussion nationally and locally, law enforcement officials throughout Oakland feel very differently about whether their departments should employ cameras worn on every officer.

Bouchard, whose agency covers 13 communities and the majority of district courts and county parks in Oakland County, said there are many situations in which body cameras would victimize the public.

“We go to a lot of calls that are very personal, very sad, very private,” Bouchard said.

“And to have a camera introduced in those situations, where the footage of those cameras is FOIA-able, meaning anybody in the public can get to see it, is hugely intrusive.”

But some, such as attorney Neil Rockind, said the Freedom of Information Act already exempts material about a victim that is personal in nature.

“There is zero percent chance that a victim’s face or body would be disclosed under FOIA,” said Rockind.

The Bloomfield Hills based attorney said body camera usage is important, because “right now we’re left with police officers telling us what they did.

“But while we have some audio to hear what they say in certain situations, we don’t have video to show what they’re doing. That’s vital to policing the police – body cams and body mics will reveal all and give transparency where right now there is none.”

Congress last year approved $22.5 million for a body worn camera program where the federal government pays for up to half the cost of purchasing body cameras, and President Barack Obama has urged for increased funding of the program.

Bouchard said locally, if body camera legislation introduced in Michigan passes, he would implement a program on the condition that the program exempts all footage from FOIA requests except when there’s a complaint against a police officer.

“(A complaint) would trigger holding the footage, an investigation of the complaint and releasing the findings of the investigation and the footage,” said Bouchard.

“So it absolutely deals with the (police) accountability questions but also protects the privacy of the public that we so intimately in some situations serve on a daily basis.”

Body cams already in use

Many law enforcement organizations throughout the country, such as in California, Connecticut, Minnesota and even in Michigan, are testing body worn cameras out in various ways.

In Detroit, officers are wearing the cameras after City Council in May approved spending $5.2 million to equip officers there with body cameras, a move that was supported by the Detroit police chief and police officers’ union.

Other agencies in Michigan – including Roseville, Lansing, Flat Rock, Dearborn and Romulus – are also using the cameras.

In Hazel Park, petitions turned in to the City Clerk’s office seeking to require all police officers to wear body cameras were turned down in May on legal grounds. And like some community leaders, some police officials are still largely against body cameras.

Troy Police Capt. Robert Redmond said the Troy Police Department has concerns about the body worn cameras.

“We see some major problems going forward,” said Redmond.

“Privacy for citizens, funding, server storage, maintaining the footage and FOIA requests. Who’s going to be footing the bill for all of that?” Redmond said.

“We’re not prepared for them, nor can we afford to pay for them.”

Studies done by the Michigan State Police indicate that about 5,000 to 7,000 Terabytes of digital information would be captured after three years if all of its troopers used body cameras, and that it would cost about $6-8 million a month.

Many open to programs

Others, however, know that all law enforcement agencies across the country will soon have to consider adopting the use of body worn cameras.

Farmington Hills Police Chief Charles Nebus said while his department doesn’t use body cameras, police administrators are open to employing a program.

“We have experimented with body cameras and are currently thinking about what a written policy would look like,” Nebus said.

“We are hoping for new legislation that would clearly answer and protect the privacy rights of our residents.”

West Bloomfield Police Chief Michael Patton said he would be in favor of a program and understands that privacy is an issue.

“But frankly, we’ll also be looking at adopting body cams to protect officers against false claims,” said Patton. “Most agencies that use (body cameras) produce positive effects, but there is a cost issue, a storage issue and hours of video that needs to be maintained and catalogued. “Right now in West Bloomfield, with all the moving parts in the state (legislature), the bill may be treading water right now. But it’s certainly in the discussion.”

Patton said he and other police chiefs and officials in Oakland County have discussed informally the potential for a consortium to test and share body cameras.

New Post has been published on http://www.rockindlaw.com/the-reason-saliva-drug-testing-hasnt-caught-on-press/

The Reason Saliva Drug Testing Hasn't Caught On (Press)

The Reason Saliva Drug Testing Hasn’t Caught On In a bid to combat rising rates of drugged driving, police departments in select counties throughout Michigan are set to launch a saliva-based drug testing program this year. But questions about the efficacy of these field tests — particularly when it comes to detecting marijuana — have delayed the program’s rollout nationwide.

Half of the states in the U.S. have legalized marijuana for either medical or recreation purposes, raising concerns about the ability of law enforcement to screen suspected drugged drivers. Though certain companies are attempting to develop marijuana breathalyzers, testing for active impairment has posed challenges. Now, law enforcement officials are starting to look into saliva testing as an alternative.

In the five Michigan counties selected for the one-year saliva testing pilot program, officers will conduct traditional sobriety tests first. If a suspect fails, officers will then administer a saliva test that’s designed to detect marijuana and other drugs such as meth, cocaine, and opioids, CBS Detroit reports. The problem is, this test isn’t particularly effective at detecting marijuana.

Paul Armentano, the deputy director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), explains why oral saliva testing isn’t effective for marijuana detection.

“By and large, the reason oral saliva testing wasn’t ready for primetime years ago was because it wasn’t particularly sensitive to picking up carboxy-THC [the metabolized form of THC that drug tests detect],” Armentano told ATTN:. “That shouldn’t surprise anybody who knows anyone or has tried marijuana themselves. One of the immediate side effects of inhaling cannabis is dry mouth, so if you’ve got a product that is being used that tends to at least temporarily dry out the saliva glands, having a test that relies on collecting saliva it probably isn’t going to be very effective.”

Armentano described why saliva testing might present problems:

“That’s the hurdle they can’t overcome on this. It’s not that if you had an adequate saliva sample that the technology isn’t there to analyze it, it’s getting that sample from people that have recently used marijuana. So when they do studies, they take people that have recently used marijuana, they give them saliva tests, and they come back negative. But they should be coming back positive. They just used the marijuana. That’s the problem with oral fluid testing. If the focus was on some of these other drugs, they’d roll the test out anyway. But since it doesn’t really work for marijuana, there’s never been a really big rollout for that.”

traffic stopWikimedia/versageek – wikimedia.org

Concerns about the science behind these saliva testing instruments has led some to criticize the Michigan State Police’s pilot program. Attorney Neil Rockind told mlive.com that the policy change would set “a dangerous precedent” for Michigan.

“The criminal justice system wants to take science and turn it into a fast, easy utility,” Rockind said. “Science is neither fast nor easy.”

RELATED: British Company Developing Field Sobriety Test for Marijuana

Share your opinion

New Post has been published on http://www.rockindlaw.com/criminal-defense-attorney-supreme-court-ruling-in-utah-v-strieff-puts-u-s-on-fast-track-for-increased-illegal-search-and-seizure-activity-%ef%bb%bf/

Criminal defense attorney: “Supreme Court ruling in Utah v. Strieff puts U.S. on fast track for increased illegal search and seizure activity” 

Criminal defense attorney: “Supreme Court ruling in Utah v. Strieff puts U.S. on fast track for increased illegal search and seizure activity”  Media Contact: Barbara Fornasiero, EAFocus Communications, cell: 248.260.8466, [email protected]

Southfield, Mich. — June 20, 2016 — Neil Rockind, founder of Southfield-based criminal defense law firm,

Rockind Law, says the Supreme Court’s decision today in Utah v Strieff isn’t just a slippery slope, it’s a fast track to open the doors for police and government agencies to conduct a search and seizure using pretext and un-related warrants.

The decision before the Supreme Court was whether the Utah Supreme Court was correct in its ruling that evidence seized from the respondent, Edward Strieff, through an outstanding traffic warrant was inadmissible, given that Strieff was illegally stopped by the police. During the traffic stop (that was without cause), the police discovered that Strieff had a warrant. The case ultimately went to the Utah Supreme Court, which ruled in

favor of Streiff, noting the evidence was obtained unconstitutionally under the Fourth Amendment because the stop was illegal. Today the Supreme Court overruled the Utah Supreme Court’s finding.

“This ruling puts the U.S. on the fast track for more – and more egregious – illegal search and seizure activity,

using pretext and warrants immaterial to the matter at hand,” Rockind said. “It’s also troubling that the

majority decision cited the constitutionality in part on the basis that the police officer in the case showed no

flagrant misconduct in the course of the search and seizure. Police behavior, good or bad, does not negate or affirm constitutionality.” 

Rockind said the dissenting opinions in the case are frighteningly on point. For example, in her dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote, “…This case allows the police to stop you on the street, demand your identification, and check it for outstanding traffic warrants—even if you are doing nothing wrong…If the officer discovers a warrant for a fine you forgot to pay, courts will now excuse his illegal stop and will admit into evidence anything he happens to find by searching you after arresting you on the warrant. Because the Fourth Amendment should prohibit, not permit, such misconduct, I dissent.” 

“Justice Sotomayor, writing in her dissent, has captured the essence of what is wrong with the Supreme Court

ruling,” Rockind said. “Given the opportunity to be vigilant in protecting a constitutional right, the Supreme

Court chose to severely weaken it instead.” 

The entire Supreme Court decision can be read here.

About Rockind Law 

Rockind Law is a Southfield, Michigan-based criminal defense law firm aggressively pursuing justice for individuals facing criminal charges, including white collar crime, drunk driving, narcotics and assault. To find out more about the firm’s services and resources, visit http://www.rockindlaw.com/.   

New Post has been published on http://www.rockindlaw.com/case-age-timelines-and-guidelines-how-the-administrators-are-destroying-the-justice-system/

Case Age Timelines And Guidelines: How The Administrators Are Destroying The Justice System

“This case is getting too old” or “this case is going to go on my ‘record'” or similar claim by a judge are being heard all too often by litigants and lawyers.  While the legal system is about getting justice, some administrator/Supreme Court Justice decided that justice can be done quickly.  They instituted silly and awkward timelines and guidelines that force trial court judges to hurry cases along.  As a trial lawyer, I have felt the pressure is these insipid rules.  Only a bean counter/ desk jockey would insist on timing criminal cases to meet a case flow timeframe. 

In Wayne County, the judges in the Frank Murphy Hall of Justice are pressured to resolve cases in a whipsawed timeframe.  It comes as no surprise then that Davontae Sanford was hustled through the legal system with inadequate representation that resulted in his wrongful conviction.  The Detroit News editorial board wrote an Op-Ed about the case:

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/opinion/editorials/2016/05/27/editorial-kym-worthy-must-free-man-wrongly-jailed/85018864/ Even they noted that the new desire for a “speedy resolution” of cases contributed to Sanford’s conviction… “Moving cases too quickly…”: This needs to stop.  Just like you wouldn’t entrust an army officer who knows about inventory and record keeping to lead troops into a battle, we shouldn’t entrust or allow administrators to dictate how long it takes to get justice.  Some cases go quickly… Some go slowly. 

New Post has been published on http://www.rockindlaw.com/3-officials-charged-in-flint-water-crisis-more-predicted-press-washington-post/

3 officials charged in Flint water crisis; more predicted (Press - Washington Post)

3 officials charged in Flint water crisis; more predicted FLINT, Mich. — The Flint water crisis has become a criminal case, with two state regulators and a city employee charged with official misconduct, evidence-tampering and other offenses over the lead contamination that alarmed the country and brought cries of racism.

For nearly 18 months, the poor, majority-black city of 100,000 used the Flint River for tap water as a way to save money — a decision made by a state-appointed emergency manager — while a new pipeline was under construction. But the water wasn’t treated to control corrosion. The result: Lead was released from aging pipes and fixtures as water flowed into homes and businesses.

“This is a road back to restoring faith and confidence in all Michigan families in their government,” state Attorney General Bill Schuette said Wednesday in announcing the first charges to come out of the disaster, blamed on a series of bad decisions by bureaucrats and political leaders.

He warned there will be more charges — “That I can guarantee” — and added: “No one is off the table.

Gov. Rick Snyder didn’t acknowledge the problem until last fall, when tests revealed high levels of lead in children, in whom the heavy metal can cause low IQs and behavioral problems.

Michael Prysby, a former district engineer with the state Department of Environmental Quality, and Stephen Busch, a supervisor in the department’s drinking water office, were charged with misconduct, conspiracy, tampering with test results and misdemeanor violations of clean-water law. The felonies carry maximum penalties of four to five years in prison.

Among other things, they were accused of failing to order anticorrosion chemicals added to the water to coat the pipes and prevent them from releasing lead.

Flint utilities administrator Michael Glasgow, who oversaw day-to-day operations at the city’s water plant at the time, also was charged Wednesday with tampering with evidence for allegedly falsifying test results and with willful neglect of duty.

Busch and Prysby pleaded not guilty and were released on bail. Both were suspended without pay. Their attorneys did not immediately return calls seeking comment.

Glasgow was also placed on leave and awaited a court appearance. A telephone number for him could not be found, and it wasn’t known whether he had a lawyer.

The crisis — and the state’s slow and dismissive response to complaints about the water from experts and residents — led to allegations of environmental racism, became an issue in the presidential race during Michigan’s Democratic primary in March, and sent other U.S. cities rushing to test their water, particularly in older neighborhoods with lead pipes.

“They failed Michigan families. Indeed, they failed us all,” Schuette said of the men charged. “I don’t care where you live.”

Essentially, all three were accused of failing to do their duty to provide safe drinking water.

“This is rare,” said Neil Rockind, a Detroit-area defense attorney and former prosecutor. “It’s very hard to find a similar case where people are charged for just being personally bad or neglectful at their job. Usually there’s some personal corrupt intent involved.”

He said outrage over the Flint water mess has created a mood “where someone has to pay.”

For months, people in Flint have been relying on filters and bottled water. Some still do not trust what comes out of their faucets, even though the city rejoined the Detroit-area water system last fall and anticorrosive phosphates are being added.

The governor filled a few jugs of filtered Flint tap water this week and pledged to drink it for 30 days to show it’s safe.

“It’s a good first step, but it’s a small step,” Flint resident Melissa Mays said of the criminal charges. “These are lower-level people, and I want to know who was instructing them to do what they did. I think it’s important that we can see some form of accountability being laid out, but at the end of the day we still can’t drink or bathe in our water safely.”

Outside experts have also suggested a link between the river and a deadly Legionnaires’ disease outbreak. During a 17-month period, there were at least 91 cases, including 12 deaths, across Genesee County, which includes Flint. That’s a fivefold increase over what the county averaged before.

After the crisis broke open, DEQ Director Dan Wyant and his spokesman resigned. The chief of the department’s drinking water office was fired. And the director of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Chicago-based Midwest office stepped down.

The Flint debacle exposed a problem that extends well beyond the one-time industrial powerhouse.

An Associated Press analysis of EPA data found that nearly 1,400 water systems serving 3.6 million Americans exceeded the federal lead standard at least once between the start of 2013 and last September.

Most U.S. cities stopped installing lead pipes in the 1930s to carry water from main lines under the streets and into homes. But a survey by the American Water Works Association found that 6.5 million of these pipes are still in use.

Some researchers question whether chemical treatment and routine testing for lead in the water are enough, arguing that the only way to remove the threat is to replace the plumbing. The cost, though, could be huge.

Michigan lawmakers are considering legislation to give Flint an emergency $25 million to replace thousands of lead pipes.

Today’s Headlines newsletter

The day’s most important stories.

New Post has been published on http://www.rockindlaw.com/7135-2/

THC and marijuana report according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).  Interesting stuff here … For Michigan our purposes, THC is marijuana.