Brandon W. Barnett | Criminal Defense Attorney | Barnett Howard & Williams PLLC

Mar 03

9

Car Seat Laws in Texas Seat Belt Regulations

Car Seat and Seat Belt Laws in Texas: Sorting Out the Laws From the Guidelines

By Brandon Barnett | Traffic Offenses

Baby On Board: What Does Texas Law Say About Keeping Our Kids Safe in the Car?

Car Seat Laws in Texas Seat Belt Regulations We’ve all seen those yellow “Baby on Board” signs proudly displayed by new parents on the back windows of cars. In a perfect world, drivers would slow down and car accidents involving children would never be an issue. But we don’t live in a perfect world. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (“IIHS”) reports that car accidents cause one in four unintentional injury deaths in children younger than 13. The IIHS explains that while most crash deaths occur among children traveling as passengers, proper restraint use dramatically reduces these fatalities.

Such statistics are a sobering reminder that we must do all we can do to ensure that our kids are safe while traveling in a car. So what can Texas families do to make our daily commutes safer for our children? What does Texas law say about keeping our kids safe in the car?

Car Seat Laws in Texas

The car seat law in Texas, meaning the rules for which you can be issued a Class C citation, are provided in the Transportation Code. Section 545.412(a) of the Texas Transportation Code states:

“A person commits an offense if the person operates a passenger vehicle, transports a child who is younger than eight years of age, unless the child is taller than four feet, nine inches, and does not keep the child secured during the operation of the vehicle in a child passenger safety seat system according to the instructions of the manufacturer of the safety seat system.”

SUMMARY OF TEXAS CAR SEAT LAW:

8 years – Children must remain in some sort of car seat or booster seat system until they are 8 years old;
4’9″ Tall – If a child younger than 8 is taller than 4’9″, he or she may ride in a normal seat without a booster; and
Follow manufacturer instructions – It is a violation to use a safety seat improperly.

One of the important parts of the Texas car seat law is that seat must be properly installed according to the manufacturer’s instructions. USA Today reports that nearly half of all car seats are installed improperly. Many law enforcement agencies are trained to understand proper car seat installation. While it is unlikely that an officer will issue you a citation if you have a car seat that happens to be improperly installed, you should still make sure to get your car seat checked out for the safety of your child.

DEFENSE: It is a defense to prosecution that the individual is operating their vehicle during an emergency or for a law enforcement purpose.

PENALTY: Failure to comply with §545.412(a) may result in a fine ranging from $25 to $250, plus court fees.

Car Seat Guidelines in Texas

Some additional car seat tips are provided as safety guidelines or best practices, meaning that there is not a law on the books in Texas covering this. However, these are good practices that are taught by doctors and child car safety experts:

All infants and toddlers should ride in a rear-facing car seat until they are at least two years old, or until they max out the weight or height limits per the manufacturer’s limits.
Children two to four years old may ride in a forward-facing seat according to the manufacturer’s recommendations.
Use a booster seat for children four to eight years old, according to the maximum height or weight limits provided by the manufacturer.
Most seat belts will fit a child that is 4’9″ tall (normally around 10 years old). If your child is not 4’9″ tall, you should consider keeping them in a booster seat to ensure proper seatbelt fit.

Seat Belt Laws in Texas

Under Texas law, all passengers in a motor vehicle must wear a seatbelt. There are a few exceptions, like for postman, paper delivery crews, or garbage men; but for the average driver and passenger on the Texas roads, you must wear a seat belt. Section 545.413(a) of the Texas Transportation Code covers seat belt laws in Texas. The law states:

“a person commits an offense if the person, who at least 15 years of age, rides in a passenger vehicle while the vehicle is being operated and is occupying a seat that is equipped with a safety belt, and is not secured by a safety belt.”

Further, §545.413(b) states that:

“a person commits an offense if the person operates a passenger vehicle that is equipped with safety belts and allows a child, who is younger than 17 years old and not required to be in a safety seat system, to ride in the vehicle without requiring the child to be secured by a safety belt.”

Can a Teenager Ride in the Bed of a Pickup Truck? No. Under Texas law, no person under 18 years of age may ride unrestrained in the bed of a pickup truck.

PENALTY: A violation of the seat belt law in Texas can result in a fine of $25 to $200 depending on the situation.

For teenagers, who are legally permitted to ride in the front passenger seat, the Texas Department of Transportation advises that wearing a seat belt while sitting in the front seat improves survival of a car accident by 50%. To be effective seat belts must be used properly—lap belts need to fit snugly on the hips and shoulder belts should go over the shoulder and across the center of the chest. Texas law says that safety belts—designed for adult use only—are not adequate for children under 8.

Front Seat and Back Seat Passenger Laws in Texas

There is not a law in Texas regarding who may ride in the front seat. The driver must follow the car seat and seat belt laws, but there is not a law prohibiting any person or child from riding in the front seat. However, according to the safety “guidelines,” anyone under age thirteen should be restrained in the back seat due to concerns with airbag impact.

Can I Leave My Kids Alone In the Car in Texas?

Yes, but only for 5 minutes. In 2010, thirteen children in Texas were killed by vehicular heatstroke. As a result, the Texas legislature enacted laws dealing with the amount of time children can be left in a vehicle unattended. Under Texas Penal Code §22.10(a), “a person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly leaves a child in a motor vehicle for longer than five minutes, knowing that the child is (1) younger than seven years of age; and (2) not attended by an individual in the vehicle who is 14 years of age or older.”

An offense under this section is a Class C misdemeanor. However, if the child is injured as a result of being left in the car, the crime can be increased to a felony, punishable by up to two years in jail and a $10,000 fine.

For More Information About Car Safety in Texas:

Barnett Howard & Williams PLLC
Rated 5.0 out of 5 based on
57 Google+ Reviews.

Mar 01

5

Beware of Dog Bite Laws in Texas: Criminal Penalties for Owners of Dangerous Dogs

By Brandon Barnett | Dog Attack

Texas Law Regarding Dog Owners and Dog Attacks

Texas Dog Bite Laws Dangerous Dog Believe it or not, a person could be criminally liable, meaning they could be convicted of a crime, if their dog attacks someone. Texas appellate courts have recently upheld Texas’ dog bite law, also known as Lillian’s Law. Therefore, it is important to be aware of what is required of you as a dog owner. The article below outlines Texas law as it relates to dog owner responsibility. If you own a dog that has displayed dangerous tendencies, you should take a look.

Can I be Convicted of a Crime in Texas if My Dog Attacks Someone?

Yes. In Texas, you can be convicted of a felony offense if your dog attacks and injures someone. There are two instances in which a dog owner can be convicted of a criminal offense for a dog attack:

If, with criminal negligence as defined by §6.03 of the Penal Code, they fail to secure the dog and the dog, in a place other than the owner’s real property, boat, or motor vehicle, makes an unprovoked attack on another person that causes serious bodily injury or death; and
If they know their dog is a dangerous dog by receiving notice in a manner described in the Texas Health & Safety Code, and the dog, in a place other than the owner’s real property, boat, or motor vehicle, makes an unprovoked attack on another person that causes serious bodily injury or death.

The offense is a third degree felony, which is punishable by 2-10 years in prison and a fine of up to $10,000. If the attack causes death, then it’s a second degree felony punishable by 2-20 years in prison and a fine of up to $10,000.

How do I know if my dog is considered a “Dangerous Dog” under Texas law?

Under the Texas Health and Safety Code, a “dangerous dog” is a dog that makes (1) an unprovoked attack on a person that causes bodily injury or death or (2) commits unprovoked acts leading a reasonable person to believe that the dog will attack them in a place other than an enclosure reasonably certain to prevent escape by the dog.

The law recognizes 3 ways for you to learn that your dog is considered a “dangerous dog”:

You know your dog has attacked someone;
You received notice from the court that they have found the dog to be a “dangerous dog;” or
Animal control informed you that the dog is a “dangerous dog.”

What are my requirements if I know my dog is a “Dangerous Dog”?

Within 30 days after a person is informed that they are the owner of a dangerous dog, the person must:

Register the dog with animal control authority for that area;
Restrain the dog in a secure enclosure* or on a leash in the immediate control of a person;
Be able to show financial responsibility of at least $100,000 to cover any damages from an attack (i.e. liability insurance coverage of at least $100,000);
Comply with any local regulation, requirements, or restriction.

*A secure enclosure means a “fenced area or structure that is”

Locked;
Capable of preventing the entry of the general public, including children;
Capable of preventing the dog from leaving on its own;
Clearly marked as containing a dangerous do; and
In compliance with the enclosure requirements established by the local animal control.

What Defenses are Available if I Have Been Charged With the Dog Bite Statute?

A person has a defense to criminal liability for a dog bite case if:

The person is a veterinarian, veterinary clinic employee, a peace officer, employee of a recognized animal shelter, dog trainer/employee of a guard dog company, or a person employed by the state or the state’s political division to deal with stray animals AND has temporary ownership, custody, or control of the dog in connection with their position.
The person is employed by the Texas Department of Criminal Justice or other law enforcement agency and is training or using the dog in connection at the time of the attack.
The person has a disability, the dog is trained to provide assistance to a person with a disability, and the person is using the dog to provide assistance in connection with their disability.
The person attacked was in the process of committing a homicide, kidnapping, trafficking of a person, sexual offense, assaultive offense, any property damage or destruction, robbery, burglary, or criminal trespass.
At the time of attack, the dog was on a leash and the person was in immediate control of the dog OR if not, the person was making immediate and reasonable attempts to regain control.

A person has an affirmative defense if, at the time of attack,:

The person and the dog are participating in an organized search and rescue effort at the request of law enforcement.
The person and the dog are participating in an organized dog show/event sponsored by a recognized kennel club.
The person and the dog are participating in a lawful hunting activity or farming/ranching activity.

Tarrant County Animal Control Links

If you need to register your dog with animal control or if you need to ask more questions after reading this article, below are the links to some local animal control offices in Tarrant County:

Feb 29

3

Texas’ Online Crime Marketplace: Craigslist Crimes, Craigslist Stings, and Craigslist Thefts

By Brandon Barnett | Computer Crimes, Theft

Craigslist-Related Crimes | New Crimes in the Digital Age

Craigslist Crimes in Texas Gone are the days of flipping through your local newspaper’s classified section and circling your favorite ads. These days, Craigslist is the new classifieds of Fort Worth and Dallas. It is the one stop shop source to find a new car, truck, job, furniture, garage sale, or even a love interest. With the rise of Craigslist (and other online forums), there has also been an increase in criminal activity ranging from online scams to fraud and theft. Police stings based on advertisements from Craigslist are also common. Police have seen such a meteoric rise in these “Craigslist related crimes”, that many departments have established “safe exchange locations where transactions can occur under the watchful eye of local law enforcement.

Whenever people meet to engage in a transaction, crime can occur. These crimes can take place anywhere, whether you are in an urban or rural area, in the parking lot of the local shopping center, or even on your own front porch. Craigslist is easily accessible, and is increasingly used to create opportunities for one party to take advantage of another. It is essential to be vigilant whenever meeting up with anyone from the Internet.

Craigslist Criminal Investigations | Fort Worth, Texas

With the advent of Craigslist, law enforcement agencies have seen a few specific areas of criminal activity increase rapidly. These investigations into alleged crimes often facilitated by Craigslist include:

Craigslist Robbery: Increasingly, people will post ads on craigslist looking to buy or sell an expensive item, such as a cell phone, and when the other party arrives take either the item or the money by force. Avoid being a target by meeting buyers or sellers at a “safe exchange” location set up by the police department.
Craigslist Prostitution: Craigslist is full of ads looking for love, and both men and woman can get caught up in activity they may not have even realized was criminal until too late. Craigslist is used to source potential targets, and can result in charges from soliciting sex with a minor to soliciting sex for pay. Police departments are increasingly using Craigslist to set up sting operations to catch people trying to engage in prostitution.
Craigslist Drug Charges: Police are seeing an increase in advertisements for illegal drugs posted on Craigslist using code words. Engaging in a dialogue with someone posting one of these ads could lead police to believe you are involved in drug dealing or drug trafficking through ads placed on Craigslist.

Defending Craigslist-Related Criminal Cases

Defense of Craigslist-related criminal charges can be a very complex proposition, requiring legal counsel experienced in these types of matters and the technology it involves. Forensic Computer Specialists and other experts may be necessary to the investigation and protecting your constitutional rights. Seek counsel from experienced criminal defense attorneys at Barnett Howard & Williams PLLC, former prosecutors with an in-depth understanding of the criminal justice system and its applications in today’s Internet-oriented society.

Contact Our Fort Worth Craigslist Crimes Defense Attorneys Today!

At Barnett Howard & Williams PLLC, our attorneys understand how to investigate and defend against complex computer-related criminal charges, including Craigslist-related charges. To schedule a free consultation, contact us at our offices in Fort Worth, Texas, at 817-993-9249.

Barnett Howard & Williams PLLC
Rated 5.0 out of 5 based on
30 Google+ Reviews.

Feb 24

2

Warrantless Search Mattress Protective Sweep Texas

Warrantless Search Under a Man’s Mattress Held Constitutional

By Brandon Barnett | Search & Seizure

United States v. Garcia-Lopez (5th Circuit, 2016)

FACTS: On February 5, 2014, the Wharton County Deputy Sheriff’s Department served a felony arrest warrant on Yonari Garcia at his father’s trailer home. Yonari’s father told law enforcement that Yonari was not home, however, consented to a search of the trailer. Upon entry, Garcia-Lopez, Yonari’s brother, made a beeline for a bedroom, closing and locking the door. Law enforcement followed Garcia-Lopez and demanded that the door be unlocked. Garcia-Lopez opened the door and the police entered, continuing the search for Yonari. Garcia-Lopez asked if he could sit on his bed and eat his dinner while police searched the room. The police obliged the odd request. A minute later, law enforcement discovered two sets of bullet-proof vests in plain sight, prompting a background check. Garcia-Lopez was a convicted felon and having the body armor was a violation for being a felon in possession of body armor, U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). The police arrested Garcia-Lopez after being in the home a total of three minutes. After the arrest, police continued searching the Garcia-Lopez’s room. Concerned Yonari might be sheltered in a hollowed-out mattress, the police lifted the bed up, discovering ammunition and three handguns sandwiched between the mattress and box springs. After a total of seven minutes inside the trailer, the police left with Garcia-Lopez under arrest.

See the 5th Circuit’s full opinion in United States v Garcia Lopez.

Garcia-Lopez Indicted for Federal Firearms Charges

In March 2014, Garcia-Lopez was indicted on six counts of being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of USC §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(a)(2). During an evidentiary hearing, the district court denied Garcia-Lopez’s motion to suppress the guns found under the mattress because law enforcement was originally in the trailer for a legitimate purpose and they had a right to search the home pursuant to the valid arrest warrant for Yonari. The court added that upon the valid search of the premises, law enforcement found contraband and arrested Garcia-Lopez. Further the court stated that upon his arrest, law enforcement had the right to make a protective sweep, so long as it did not last an unreasonable amount of time. Additionally, there was testimony that indicated that suspects have been known to hide in hollowed-out mattress to evade arrest. According to the district court, the search for Yonari and seizure of the guns was proper in every way. Garcia-Lopez was sentenced to forty-six years imprisonment and two years of supervised release. Garcia-Lopez appealed to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, arguing that law enforcement’s belief that Yonari might have been hiding in the bed was unreasonable, and thus, unconstitutional.

Was Lifting the Mattress an Unconstitutional Search or a Lawful Protective Sweep?

The Court of Appeals must determine whether the act of “lifting up the mattress” and seizing the guns violated Garcia-Lopez’s constitutional rights. In other words, was lifting the mattress an unconstitutional search under the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures?

Under the Fourth Amendment, warrantless searches are pre se unreasonable. Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443, 474-75 (1971). A protective sweep may be conducted with [a lower threshold of] reasonable suspicion, probable cause is not necessary. Maryland v. Buie, 494 U.S. 325-27 (1990). “There must be articulable facts which, taken together with the rational references from those facts, would warrant a reasonably prudent officer in believing that the area to be swept harbors an individual posing danger to those on the arrest scene.” Id. A protective sweep [must be] quick and…limited to the safety of the police. Id. Evidence seen in plain view during a lawful sweep can be seized and admitted into evidence during trial. United States v. Jackson, 596 F. 3d 236, 242 (5th Cir. 2010).

5th Circuit Holds that the Warrantless Search of the Mattress was Reasonable

Here, the Court of Appeals held that the district court’s finding of reasonable suspicion was correct because of the amount of evidence supporting such a claim. First, law enforcement became suspicious because of the standoff over the locked door. Second, Garcia-Lopez’s odd request to sit back down on the bed while the police conducted the search is suspicious in light of the circumstances. Third, the belief that a suspect could be hiding in a hollowed-out mattress is reasonable given police training and data supporting such a claim. Fourth, the search lasted a total of seven minutes—a reasonable amount of time to conduct a protective sweep. In sum, the Court says it was logical under the specific facts of this case to suspect that Yonari might have been hiding in the mattress. The Court affirms the district court’s judgment—the warrantless search under Garcia-Lopez’s mattress was not unconstitutional under the circumstances.

Feb 22

6

Bait Cars, Backpage, and the Entrapment Defense

By Brandon Barnett | Prostitution, Theft

Bait Cars Backpage Entrapment Texas Our firm has represented many defendants in Fort Worth with cases stemming from a bait car or a Backpage ad. For those of you not familiar with either, let me explain Bait Cars and Backpage.

What is a Bait Car?

A Bait Car is vehicle owned by the police department and equipped with GPS devices and cameras. But, the car looks like any regular car on the street. The police typically place something valuable inside the Bait Car, such as a paint spray rig, and then they park the car (with the keys inside) on the side of the street in a low-income part of town. If someone tries to steal the bait car or the valuables inside, the GPS is triggered, the camera is activated, and the police are alerted. In most cases, the person does not get very far before a patrol car arrives to arrest them for theft.

What is Backpage?

I doubt I can fully explain what Backpage is or how it is used, but in the cases that we see, Backpage is a website (akin to Craigslist) where escorts and ladies of the night advertise their services. Potential Johns can browse the Backpage website to arrange an interlude of momentary love. The police have been using Backpage and arranging for a female officer to meet men at a local motel room posing as a prostitute. With backup officers waiting in the bathroom, the John is arrested for Solicitation of a Prostitute when they arrive to meet the woman/officer they contacted on Backpage.

Is it Entrapment for the Police to Use a Bait Car or to Advertise on Backpage?

We get this question in every Bait Car or Backpage case. To answer the question, we typically explain that fairness and equity are not the same as the legal defense of entrapment. Just because the police conduct doesn’t seem fair or because we think the police are “creating the crimes,” does not mean that it is entrapment.

Section 8.06 of the Texas Penal Code defines the affirmative defense of Entrapment:

“It is a defense to prosecution that the actor engaged in the conduct charged because he was induced to do so by a law enforcement agent using persuasion or other means likely to cause persons to commit the offense.”

The Penal Code goes on to explain that: “Conduct merely affording a person an opportunity to commit an offense does not constitute entrapment.”

Therein lies the rub. By using a Bait Car and by advertising escort services on Backpage, the Fort Worth police are “merely affording a person an opportunity to commit an offense,” so under the law, entrapment would not apply to these situations. Don’t get me wrong, we hate Bait Cars and Backpage. We wish the police would use their time and resources toward real crimes, rather than “creating opportunities” for people to commit crimes. Why in the world would we want to create opportunities for people to commit crimes in the first place? That is similar to setting up a keg right outside the AA meeting with a sign for free beer.

Whether we like it or not, entrapment does not apply as an affirmative defense in these cases. Regardless, our attorneys still fight hard to get bait car and Backpage cases dismissed, reduced, or mitigated any way we can. Anecdotally, we’ve seen that a lot of prosecutors don’t like these cases any more than we do. Hopefully, we will see bait cars and Backpage go away soon, but until then, know that Entrapment won’t help you if you choose the wrong car or the wrong escort.

Barnett Howard & Williams PLLC
Rated 5.0 out of 5 based on
30 Google+ Reviews.

Feb 18

6

Brass Knuckles, Silencers and Prohibited Weapons in Texas

What Weapons Are Illegal to Possess in Texas?

By Brandon Barnett | Weapons Charges

Prohibited Weapons in Texas | Are Brass Knuckles Illegal in Texas?

Brass Knuckles, Silencers and Prohibited Weapons in Texas Yes, brass knuckles are illegal to possess in Texas. Under Texas’ Open Carry laws, qualified Texans can now carry a handgun in a holster on their waist just like they could in the Wild West. But there are still many other weapons that are illegal to possess or carry in Texas. Section 46.05 of the Texas Penal Code outlines the weapons that are prohibited to possess in Texas. The following is the list of weapons that are prohibited weapons in the state of Texas under Section 46.05:

Explosive weapons*
Machine guns*
Short-barrel firearms*
Firearm silencers*
Brass knuckles
Armor-piercing ammunition
Chemical dispensing devises
Zip guns; and
Tire deflation devices

*However, explosive weapons, machine guns, short-barrel firearms, and firearm silencers will not be considered prohibited weapons if the item is registered in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record. There is no such exception for brass knuckles in Texas.

What are the Consequences of Possessing Brass Knuckles or a Prohibited Weapon in Texas? | What is the Punishment for Possession of Silencers?

A person commits a criminal offense if they intentionally or knowingly possess, manufacture, transport, repair, or sell any of the prohibited weapons.

Possession of an explosive weapon, machine gun, short-barrel firearm, firearm silencer, armor-piercing ammunition, chemical dispensing device, or a zip gun is a third degree felony, punishable from 2-10 years in prison and a fine of up to $10,000
The possession of a tire deflation device is a state jail felony, punishable from 6 months to 2 years in a State Jail Facility and a fine of up to $10,000.
Finally, the possession of brass knuckles is a Class A misdemeanor, punishable by 0 – 365 days in county jail and a fine up to $4,000.

Defending Against a Brass Knuckles Charge | What Defenses are Available in a Prohibited Weapons Case?

For persons charged with possession of brass knuckles and other prohibited weapons offenses, there are several defenses that are recognized under the law.

It is a defense if the person’s conduct was in connection to the performance of official duty by the armed forces or National Guard, a governmental law enforcement agency, or a correctional facility.
Also, it is an affirmative defense if the person was dealing with a tire deflation device or armor-piercing ammunition solely for the performance in one of those official duties.
An affirmative defense is also provided to a person dealing with a short-barrel firearm or tire deflation device solely as an antique or curio.
Lastly, it is a defense if the possession of a chemical dispensing device if the person is a commissioned security officer and has received training on the use of the device by a training program provided by the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement or approved by the Texas Private Security Board of the Department of Public Safety.

Prohibited Weapons and Brass Knuckles Defense Attorneys in Fort Worth, Texas

If you are under investigation for a prohibited weapons case or if you have been charged with possession of a prohibited weapon, contact our team of Fort Worth criminal defense attorneys today. We provide a free consultation on every criminal case. As avid hunters with military experience, we are familiar firearms laws and defenses in Texas. Contact us today at (817) 993-9249.

Fort Worth Violent Crimes Attorney

Rating: ★★★★★ 5 / 5 stars

Rated By Google User
“Can’t thank this team enough for what they did for our family.”

Feb 10

8

New Law Requires Certain Sex Offenders to Have Identifying Mark on Their Passports

By Brandon Barnett | Sex Crimes

Sex Offender Passport Law On February 8, 2016, President Obama signed International Megan’s Law after it unanimously passed in Congress. International Megan’s Law has been put into place to prevent child exploitation and other sexual crimes through advanced notification of traveling sex offenders. The law will implement new notification requirements for sex offenders as well as require unique identifying marks on sex offender’s passports.

Read the language of the bill here.

Who is Required to Have an Identifying Mark on Their Passport under the International Megan’s Law?

The new law provides two categories of “covered” sexual offenders that will have to have this mark on their passport:

Sex offenders convicted of a sex offense against a minor; and
Any individual that is required to register in the sex offender registry of any jurisdiction in the National Sex Offender Registry because of an offense against a minor.

What Are the New Requirements for Sex Offenders Traveling Abroad?

Covered sex offenders must now provide to the appropriate official any information relating to their intended travel outside of the United States, including anticipated dates and all flight information, address or other contact information while outside of the U.S., purpose for travel, and any other travel-related information. The sex offender must update any changes to this information. If a sex offender knowingly fails to provide such information they shall be fined, imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both.

What Will Occur When Sex Offenders Decide to Travel Abroad?

The Angel Watch Center will be established to perform activities required by the law to gain information on sex offenders traveling abroad. The Center, not later than 48 hours before scheduled departure, will use all relevant databases, systems and sources of information to:

Determine if individuals traveling abroad are listed on the National Sex Offender Registry
Review lists of individuals who have provided advanced notice of international travel, and
Provide a list of those individuals to the United States Marshals Service’s National Sex Offender Targeting Center (Targeting Center) not in the system to determine compliance with sex offender registration requirements.

When Will Advanced Notice Be Given to Destination Countries?

The Center may give relevant information to an individual’s destination country if the individual was identified as having provided advanced notice of international travel, or if after completing the Center’s activities described above, the Center receives information pertaining to a sex offender from the Targeting Center.

Additionally, the Center may immediately give relevant information to the destination country if the Center becomes aware of a sex offender traveling outside of the U.S. within 24 hours of their intended travel and simultaneously completes the Center’s activities, or if within 24 hours of intended travel, the Center has not yet received the information pertaining to the sex offender from the Targeting Center.

What is the Process for Issuing Passports to Sex Offenders?

The Secretary of State cannot issue a passport to a covered sex offender unless the passport contains a unique identifier. Further, a passport previously issued without an identifier may be revoked. The unique identifier has not been determined yet.

The Secretary of State may reissue a passport without a unique identifier if an individual reapplies for a passport and the Angel Watch Center provides written determination that the individual is no longer required to register as a covered sex offender.

What About Sex Offenders Entering Into the United States?

Upon receiving notification that an individual who has committed an offense of a sexual nature is attempting to enter the United States, the Center will immediately share all of the information on the individual with the Department of Justice and other Federal, State, and local entities as appropriate.

Conclusion

Under this new law, sex offenders who have committed offenses pertaining to a minor child will now be required to give notification of any intended international travel and will likely have to have a passport with a unique identifying mark. Sex offenders who already have passports should be prepared for reissuance of one with the identifying mark. This mark will alert officials that this individual has committed an offense against a child. Further, destination countries will be notified of any relevant information on the sex offender. It is important to stay up to date on the requirements and implications set forth by International Megan’s Law to avoid any unintentional violations of the new requirements.

The law is still new and right now there are more questions than answers. Interested parties should be diligent to stay informed as the implementation of this law is rolled out.

Feb 09

3

Military Defendants in Texas Military Veteran Attorney

3 Things To Avoid When Representing a Military Defendant

By Brandon Barnett | Veterans

Criminal Defense Attorneys Defending a Military Defendant Must Be Careful Not to Make These Mistakes

Military Defendants in Texas Military Veteran Attorney Texas has its fair share of military bases and military servicemembers. Sometimes those servicemembers get into trouble, be it for DWI, Domestic Violence, or other criminal offenses. The military defendant, who usually has no criminal history, is not savvy with the Texas criminal justice system and must rely solely on the criminal defense attorney he selects to represent them. Below are some of the mistakes that I’ve seen when a non-military criminal defense attorney represents a military defendant. These are my opinions and should not be attributable to the United States Marine Corps or any government agency.

Mistake #1 – Allowing Your Client to Wear His Uniform to Court

You should not ask or allow your military criminal client to wear his service uniform to court. I understand that you may think his uniform will win him favor with the judge or the prosecutor, but it doesn’t. Anecdotally, I’ve spoken with several judges and prosecutors on this issue and it never inures to your client’s benefit. Whether you believe it or not, the general public (including judge and prosecutors) holds our military to a higher standard than the average defendant. Rightly or wrongly, they expect more from them and don’t like to see them as a criminal defendant. By allowing your client to wear his uniform, you skyline him and lower our Armed Forces in public esteem in the process. Unless it is an absolute emergency and his uniform is the only thing keeping your client from appearing in court naked, please ask him to wear the same thing your other clients wear to court. A court setting for a criminal case is the last place your client wants to be noticed in his dress uniform.

Mistake #2 – Not Considering the Military Consequences of a Disposition

When representing military servicemember, you need to ask and learn about the military consequences of the criminal case. Some criminal case dispositions trigger mandatory reporting to the member’s chain of command, which could (and often does) result in negative consequences in the military. Other types of cases (e.g. Domestic Violence) can result in your client losing the right to possess a firearm, which makes them non-deployable and virtually useless to their command. If your client does not know what his obligations are to his Service, seek out another attorney with military experience and ask them. DO NOT CALL YOUR CLIENT’S COMMAND OR THE BASE LEGAL COUNSEL. There is no privilege with base personnel and they will often be required to report your call to your client’s commander.

Mistake #3 – Not Requesting Your Client’s Military Record (OMPF)

Every servicemember has an OMPF or Official Military Personnel File. The OMPF will tell you everything you need to know about your client’s service. It will show you awards, deployments, performance ratings, disciplinary actions, and more. If you plan on using your client’s service as a positive mark in his favor, you should do your research to make sure that his service has indeed been positive. Your client may have below average ratings, several minor disciplinary infractions, and a Letters of Reprimand in his file. Or he may have combat awards, Letter of Appreciation, and early promotion recommendations. A savvy prosecutor will know all of this. The military shares information with the DA when requested. So before you drape yourself and your client in the flag, you should probably learn a little more about how “honorable” his service has been.

Military Veteran Representing Military Defendants in Texas State Courts

Brandon Barnett is a criminal defense attorney in Fort Worth, Texas with Barnett Howard & Williams PLLC. He is a veteran of the US Marine Corps and Operation Iraqi Freedom. He currently serves a reserve Military Judge for special and general courts-martial. Mr. Barnett teaches Military Justice at Texas A&M University School of Law in Fort Worth. For a free consultation of your Texas criminal case or to consult with Mr. Barnett about the potential military consequences of a criminal disposition, contact him at (817) 993-9249.

Feb 04

4

Who Qualifies as a “Victim” Under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act?

By Brandon Barnett | Fraud

Definition of “Victim” under the MVRA, leaves HUD out in the Cold | Who Qualifies for Relief Under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act?

United States v. Benns (5th Circuit, 2016) is a case regarding the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act (MVRA). In this case, the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that HUD is not a victim of the defendant’s crime, even though the HUD was out a considerable amount of money after defendant forged a credit application. Read more about USA v. Benns below.

Anxious Couple Seeks Help for Mortgage Default

Desperate for relief from a mortgage in arrears, Michael and Brenda Arnold conveyed ownership rights of their Arlington home to Rickey Benns. At the time of the conveyance, Benns agreed to rent the home and pay the mortgage from the profits made from future tenants. The mortgage loan, held by Bank of America and insured by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”), remained in the Arnold family’s name. Unfortunately, Benns reneged on his agreement and failed to pay off the mortgage, triggering foreclosure proceedings against the Arnolds, unbeknownst to them.

Looming Foreclosure Leads to Desperate Acts of Forgery

In an attempt to prevent foreclosure of the property, Benns secretly tried to refinance the property. Benns forged Arnolds’s signatures on loan modification documents and used a false pay stub to trick the bank into believing the Arnolds were creditworthy and still owned the property. After the application was denied by the bank, the property was eventually foreclosed on and sold below market value. Because Bank of America’s mortgage was insured by HUD, HUD paid the bank $54,906.59—the difference between what HUD paid Bank of America following foreclosure and the later sale price of the property.

A Plea is Entered and Restitution is Ordered

Benns plead guilty to one count of making false statement on a credit application, a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1014. Upon entering the guilty plea, Benns “accepted the accuracy of a factual resume prepared by the government…author[izing] restitution to the victims of the community…includ[ing] restitution arising from all relevant conduct, not limited to that arising from the offense of conviction alone.” Benns was sentenced to twenty-seven months imprisonment, five years of supervised release, and ordered to pay restitution, totaling $544,602.42, under the federal Mandatory Victims Restitution Act (“MVRA”). Benns appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, arguing that HUD was not a victim of his convicted offense.

What is the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act (“MVRA”)?

The MVRA requires district courts to order restitution payments to crime victims during sentencing. 18 U.S.C. § 3663A. Under federal law, a victim is defined as, “a person directly and proximately harmed as a result of the commission of an offense for which restitution may be ordered.” Id. Typically, restitution is limited to losses arising from underlying conduct of a defendant’s offense of conviction. Hughley v. United States, 495 U.S. 411, 412-13 (1990); United States v. Espinoza, 677 F.3d 730, 732 (5th Cir. 2012); United States v. Maturin, 488 F.3d 657, 660-61 (5th Cir. 2007). To be a considered a victim under the MVRA, a person or organization must “suffer a foreseeable loss as a result of the conduct underlying the convicted offense.” Id. The government must establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, direct or proximate causation between the conduct underlying the offense and the actual loss suffered by the victim. United States v. Reese, 998 F.2d 1275, 1282 (5th Cir. 1993).

The Big Issue: Is HUD really a victim of Benns’s forgery scheme?

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit must determine whether HUD was a victim of Benn’s convicted offense. If the Court finds that HUD was a victim, then HUD will receive restitution under the MVRA. If the Court finds that HUD was not a victim, then Benns’ restitution award, which was imposed by the district court, could be amended or vacated altogether.

The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Weighs In with a Surprising Twist

Here, the Court weighs the argument made by the government against the facts of the case. The government argues that HUD’s loss was a direct result of Benn’s false credit application because the filing of the application itself delayed the foreclosure, which resulted in HUD selling the property at a loss. However, the Court states that the government did not produce evidence that the false credit application resulted in a delay, or that such a delay resulted in a greater loss for HUD than if HUD had sold the property any sooner than it actually did. The Court holds, because of the lack of evidence connecting the false credit application with the loss incurred by HUD, HUD is not to be considered a “victim” under the MVRA and, accordingly, cannot receive an award of restitution. “Benns was indicted and pleaded guilty to one count of filing a false credit application…it therefore does not follow that the behavior underlying Benn’s offense was the cause of HUD’s loss.”

Restitution could have only been awarded had the government established a direct or proximate causation between Benn’s false credit application and HUD’s loss when HUD sold the property at a foreclosure auction. The Court says the government failed to do so. Even though HUD was out $54,906.59, the Court does not consider HUD to be a victim of Benn’s convicted offense and vacates the restitution award.

Feb 02

4

Pointers on Being a Judge Fort Worth Criminal Defense

7 Pointers on Being a Judge

By Brandon Barnett | Ethics

Some Words of Wisdom From the Top Military Appellate Bench

Pointers on Being a Judge Fort Worth Criminal Defense This week I am taking a break from my Fort Worth criminal defense cases to attend a Continuing Legal Eduction at the Air Force Judge Advocate General’s School at Maxwell Air Force Base in Montgomery, Alabama. I am a reserve military judge in the Marine Corps and this is one of the annual training requirements for military judges. In one of our periods of instruction, the Chief Judge from the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (the highest court in the military justice system) gave us seven helpful tips on Being a Judge. I found them to be simple yet incredibly insightful. As you read these, you’ll notice that they not only apply to military judges, but state judges, prosecutors, and criminal defense lawyers as well.

Be Kind
Be Patient
Be Dignified
Don’t Take Yourself Too Seriously
Don’t Be Dismayed When You are Reversed* (*or overruled for the trial lawyers)
Remember That There are No Unimportant Cases
Don’t Forget Your Common Sense

Simple, insightful, and easy to apply to our practice every day. We would all do well to observe these tips as often as possible. Practicing criminal defense in Fort Worth, I am fortunate to observe my colleagues, adversaries, and judges applying these pointers all the time. But sometimes there are cases or opposing counsel that tempt us to violate some of these rules (especially rules 1-3). I am thankful for the reminders and will continue to apply them to my practice both on the bench in the military and in the courtroom in Fort Worth.

Some of my other favorite quotes that tie in with this advice:

“Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.”

-General James “Mad Dog” Mattis, USMC (Retired)

“All you have to do is follow three simple rules. One, never underestimate your opponent. Expect the unexpected. Two take it outside. Never start anything inside the bar unless it’s absolutely necessary. And three, be nice.”

-Dalton (Patrick Swayze), Roadhouse

Brandon Barnett