In November 2014, California voters passed Proposition 47 (Prop 47) by a wide margin, seeking to make all drug possession and thefts of under $950 into misdemeanors.  Prior to Prop 47, possession of cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine, marijuana concentrate and other controlled substances could result in a felony charge.  Additionally, shoplifters and other petty thieves could be charged with felony thefts, even for thefts resulting in little to no actual monetary loss to the victims.  In the time since Prop 47 passed, many drug possession and petty theft cases that would previously have been filed as felonies became misdemeanors.  With the lighter sentences and lesser severity of these charges, Prop 47 has the effect of lessening the load on California courts, the county jails, the California prisons, and the county probation department, saving tax payers money and allowing law enforcement resources to be better allocated to fight serious crimes.  An important impact of the shift from felony to misdemeanor of some of these nonviolent, often victimless crimes, is that cases that were once filed by the District Attorney's office as felonies became the domain of the LA City Attorney's Office and other local misdemeanor criminal prosecuting agencies (e.g. Burbank City Attorney, Pasadena City Prosecutor, Long Beach City Prosecutor, Santa Monica City Attorney, etc.).  With an influx of new cases for the misdemeanor prosecuting agencies, many of these agencies were forced to hire additional staff to handle the increased volume.  What did not happen is that the DA has not made any layoffs to reflect that they do not have as many cases to file anymore. 

The voters told the government that they do not need as many felony prosecutors because the kinds of cases being filed as felonies should not be a high priority (petty thefts and drug possession).  Rather than to accept this reality, the District Attorney's office in Los Angeles (and likely those in other California counties) is fighting back by filing cases that they really have no business filing.  These untrustworthy government employees place a higher value on their job security than they place on the liberty of the citizens they are supposed to protect and serve.  The District Attorney's office is supposed to represent the People of the State of California, but continue to ignore their voice, as they overcharge Angelenos so that it will look like we still need them.  There is no accountability for frivolous criminal filings, and unfortunately many of LA County's judges are 1. former prosecutors, and 2. also dependent on inflated filings for their own job security.

THIS CURRENT CLIMATE OF OVERCHARGING DEFENDANTS TO PROTECT GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE JOB SECURITY MUST BE BROUGHT TO THE PUBLIC'S ATTENTION AND MUST BE BROUGHT TO AN END!

Here are some examples of how the DA's office is attempting to circumvent the will of the People to keep their cushy jobs:

1.  POSSESSION FOR SALE - Prior to Prop 47, a person caught with 3 grams of meth or cocaine would generally face a felony possession of a controlled substance charge.  Absent other indicia of sales (scales, packaged for sale, baggies, test messages, etc.), this possession would almost never be charged as possession for sale.  Since Prop 47, the law enforcement side does not want to submit to the will of the people and treat drug possession as a misdemeanor.  As such, cases are increasingly being filed as possession for sale, even where no evidence of sales exists.  This is being done in order to keep filing numbers up and avoid lay-offs.  Though I do not want to see anyone lose their jobs, seeing this tactic used to threaten people's liberty just so that others do not have to look for different work is beyond troubling and needs to be brought to public attention. 
More About CA Drug Crimes |  More About CA Drug Sales Offenses

2.  BRINGING DRUGS INTO A JAIL - Another, more intricate, way that law enforcement and prosecutors are still seeking to assign felony penalties to misdemeanor conduct is by arresting someone who has drugs on their person, bringing them to jail, then charging them with bringing drugs into a jail.  Several years ago, a drug addict might be approached by law enforcement for appearing to be under the influence or for possession of drug paraphernalia, and searched.  If drugs were located as a result of the search, the suspect could face felony charges.  Today, police have to live with the fact that simple drug possession is now a misdemeanor.  As such, what they are doing now is that they will arrest a person for being under the influence or for possession of drug paraphernalia, perform a minimal search at the scene, then bring the person to jail with the drugs still on their person.  This way, the suspect can be charged with a felony for "knowingly" bringing drugs into the jail.  It is of no consequence that the defendant will have been read their "right to remain silent" prior to being asked, at booking, whether they possessed drugs.  The law against bringing drugs into the jail was designed to deter visitors from trying to sneak drugs to an inmate, corrections officers from doing so, or to stop those who have a surrender date from hiding drugs inside their body.  The law did not intend for this application, and arresting people who happen to have drugs on them, then bringing them to jail and charging them with bringing drugs into the jail is a dishonest ploy, currently subject to heavier use to protect prosecutors' jobs.
More About Bringing Drugs Into a Jail Charges

3.  ESTES ROBBERY - This is not a new tactic by the DA's office to try to make shoplifting a very serious crime (a felony and a strike), but we can expect that it will now be used more frequently.  Previously, the DA could charge a felony theft for any amount by alleging that a shoplifter entered the store with the intent to commit a theft.  They could show this intent through admissions by the defendant, a lack of money to pay for the selected items, or by possession of tools to aid in the theft (tin foil lined bags, tools to remove sensors, etc.).  Prop 47 explicitly prohibits this kind of filing anymore.  If the value of stolen property is below $950, it can only be a felony if achieved by the use of force, a Robbery.  Robbery is a very serious crime because of the violence and/or threat of violence that is associated with a taking by force.  Many stores have loss prevention personnel who will use force to try to stop a shoplifter.  Shoplifters can be grabbed, tackled, struck, shoved, tripped, etc. and the store's security personnel will not face any criminal charges.  If the suspected shoplifter so much as pulls away from the grasp of store security, the DA's office may use that minimal use of force to charge a Robbery.  This despicable overcharging is done in order to seek punishment that does not fit the crime and to inflate felony filing statistics and protect the jobs of prosecutors and law enforcement. 
More About Robbery Charges | More About California Theft Crimes | More About Burglary Charges

4.  DISHONEST MATH - Just weeks after the passage of Prop 47, I had a grand theft case where my client was alleged to have stolen some property that added up to a value of $1000.  Due to a prior strike conviction, my client faced a minimum of 44 months if convicted of a new felony.  The DA charged my client with a felony and offered him the minimum.  We set the case for the preliminary hearing, spoke to the victim and determined that the value of the items in question was, without question, below $800.  Though I cannot say with any certainty that the bad math was intentional, it is clear that the officer, the filing DA, and the DA handling the preliminary hearing were acting with such zeal that they were blinded to some of the simplest math imaginable.  They wanted to charge a felony, and wanted to send my client away for 3+ years so bad that they either (1) lied about the value of the stolen property, or (2) were unable to add $400 + $200 + $200.  Notwithstanding the issue of whether these people are smart enough to be handling such a task, it is clear that they cannot be trusted and that a good defense is necessary in every felony theft case.  I recently had a similar case where the value of the stolen items was inflated to support a felony filing, without any evidence to support that inflated value.  I was able to get both cases reduced to misdemeanors, but their initial filing as felonies is no less troubling because of my diligence in defending my clients.  What of those who do not get dedicated representation?  Overzealous prosecutions cannot be permitted.
More About California Theft Crimes

5.  FILING WEAK CASES - Fighting even the weakest criminal case takes time, money and can have serious consequences for the accused.  The government's burden at preliminary hearing is so low, that the DA's office knows they can get people to plead guilty, even in the absence of evidence required to prove guilt at trial.  A person charged with a felony must wait at least three months to be brought to trial.  If in custody, there may be an opportunity to get out sooner with a guilty plea.  This results in many people pleading guilty to crimes that cannot be proven at trial.  These charges should not even be filed, but are due to job security concerns and a desire to keep filing statistics inflated.  Whereas the DA's office may have previously met certain accusations with skepticism, or would have wanted stronger corroborating evidence before filing a case, their loss of drug possession and minor theft offenses has left them hungry for filings.  So much so that they are willing to file cases rooted in untrustworthy accusations or otherwise without merit.

To say that a conflict of interest has arisen out of the passage of Prop 47 is an understatement.  Those with decision-making authority with regards to criminal filings cannot be trusted to execute that duty where their fair administration of the law would result in their unemployment.  These leeches must be directed from outside, from the community and from lawmakers, to cease this disturbing practice of overcharging civilians for their own financial gain.  The courts and the criminal justice system generally do not provide a sufficient check.  Write to your congresspeople, write to the media.  LET IT BE KNOWN THAT WE WILL NOT STAND FOR THIS INJUSTICE!

IF YOU OR A LOVED ONE HAS BEEN CHARGED WITH A CRIME IN LOS ANGELES, CONTACT THE LAW OFFICES OF NICHOLAS LONCAR NOW FOR A FREE CONSULTATION WITH A LOS ANGELES CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY.  213-375-3775