Collect Call with Lawstache

By: Anton Vialtsin Esq.
  • Summary

  • Every week, host Anton Vialtsin (California attorney and YouTuber) discusses legal cases from the Supreme Court, 9th Circuit, and California State Courts. We focus on the First, Second, Fourth, Fifth, and Eighth Amendments. We make predictions and scrutinize the law. Anton Vialtsin handled over a hundred federal criminal cases from initial client interviews through sentencing. He has an in-depth knowledge of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, the Federal Criminal Codes and Rules, mandatory-minimum sentences, the death penalty, and too many state laws to list.
    © 2023 Collect Call with Lawstache
    Show more Show less
activate_Holiday_promo_in_buybox_DT_T2
Episodes
  • Police prolonged a stop by waiting for a K-9 unit to arrive because driver had air freshers.
    Nov 20 2024

    The Fourth Amendment protects “[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons ... against unreasonable searches and seizures.”U.S. Const.amend. IV. A traffic stop constitutes a “seizure” under the Fourth Amendment. Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806, 809–10 (1996);Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648, 653 (1979). The reasonableness of a traffic stop depends on whether the police have reasonable suspicion to believe that a traffic violation has occurred. Heien v. North Carolina, 574 U.S. 54, 60 (2014).

    A traffic stop that is constitutionally inbounds at its inception could eventually impinge on the vehicle occupant’s rights in some circumstances. If an officer executes a traffic stop unreasonably, the stop could violate the Fourth Amendment rights of the person seized. Illinois v. Caballes, 543 U.S. 405, 407 (2005). “A lawful traffic stop must therefore be limited in scope and duration.” United States v. Whitley, 34 F.4th 522, 529 (6th Cir. 2022) (citing Rodriguez v. United States, 575 U.S. 348, 354 (2015)). An officer needs reasonable suspicion to prolong a traffic stop beyond what is necessary to resolve the initial reason for the stop. Rodriguez, 575 U.S. at 354–55.

    To continue detaining Taylor after the time that was necessary to complete the traffic citation, Officer Cox needed reasonable suspicion of wrongdoing (other than speeding). Rodriguez, 575 U.S. at 350.

    According to the government, several facts that Officer Cox learned during the indisputably permissible part of the stop gave her reasonable suspicion to prolong the stop to await the K-9 unit. Those facts include: (1) Taylor’s travel plans; (2) Taylor’s criminal history involving firearms and narcotics; (3) multiple air fresheners on Taylor’s gear shift; and (4)Taylor’s odd movements while searching for proof of insurance.

    Under the totality of the circumstances and viewing the facts in the light most favorable to the government, Officer Cox did not have reasonable suspicion to prolong the traffic stop. The reasonable-suspicion indicators are weak and subject to qualification. In fact, the district court recognized that Taylor’s travel plans, criminal history, and air fresheners may not have been enough to establish re

    Anton Vialtsin, Esq.
    LAWSTACHE™ LAW FIRM | Criminal Defense and Business Law
    https://lawstache.com
    (619) 357-6677

    Do you want to buy our Lawstache merchandise? Maybe a t-shirt?
    https://lawstache.com/merch/

    Want to mail me something (usually mustache related)? Send it to 185 West F Street, Suite 100-D, San Diego, CA 92101

    Want to learn about our recent victories?
    https://lawstache.com/results-notable-cases/

    If you'd like to support this channel, please consider purchasing some of the following products. We get a little kickback, and it does NOT cost you anything extra:

    *Calvin Klein Men's Dress Shirt Slim Fit Non-iron, https://amzn.to/3zm6mkf
    *Calvin Klein Men's Slim Fit Dress Pant, https://amzn.to/3G8jLQG
    *Johnson and Murphy Shoes, https://amzn.to/3KmfX0Y
    *Harley-Davidson Men's Eagle Piston Long Sleeve Crew Shirt, https://amzn.to/43gFtMC
    *Amazon Basics Tank Style Highlighters, https://amzn.to/3zwOEKZ
    *Pilot Varsity Disposable Fountain Pens, https://amzn.to/40EjSfm
    *Apple 2023 Mac Mini Desktop Computer, https://amzn.to/3Km2aGC
    *ClearSpace Plastic Storage Bins, https://amzn.to/3Kzle5q

    Are you are a Russian speaker? Вы говорите по-русски?
    https://russiansandiegoattorney.com

    Based in San Diego, CA
    Licensed: California, Nevada, and Federal Courts

    The San Diego-based business litigation and criminal defense attorneys at LAWSTACHE™ LAW FIRM are e...

    Show more Show less
    14 mins
  • Police detained an innocent guy, who didn't match description and had no connection to the crime
    Nov 13 2024

    Responding to a report of suspicious activity in the area, a police officer unlawfully detained a bystander who had no apparent connection to the report. The officer ran a records search and learned that the bystander, Duvanh Anthony McWilliams, was on parole and subject to warrantless, suspicionless parole searches. The officer proceeded to search McWilliams and his vehicle, where the officer found an unloaded gun, ammunition, drugs, and drug paraphernalia.

    As a general rule, evidence seized as a result of an unlawful search or seizure is inadmissible against the defendant in a subsequent prosecution. But the law permits use of the evidence when the causal connection "between the lawless conduct of the police and the discovery of the challenged evidence has `become so attenuated as to dissipate the taint.'" (Wong Sun v. United States (1963) 371 U.S. 471, 487.) Here, the Court of Appeal held that the officer's discovery of McWilliams's parole search condition sufficiently attenuated the connection between the unlawful detention and the contraband found in McWilliams's vehicle. The Court of Appeal relied on cases allowing the admission of evidence seized incident to arrest on a valid warrant, where the warrant was discovered during an unlawful investigatory stop. (Utah v. Strieff (2016) 579 U.S. 232 (Strieff); People v. Brendlin (2008) 45 Cal.4th 262 (Brendlin).)

    We now reverse. Unlike an arrest on an outstanding warrant, a parole search is not a ministerial act dictated by judicial mandate (Strieff, supra, 579 U.S. at p. 240), but a matter of discretion. We conclude the officer's discretionary decision to conduct the parole search did not sufficiently attenuate the connection between the officer's initial unlawful decision to detain McWilliams and the discovery of contraband. The evidence therefore was not admissible against him.

    See full case here: People v. McWilliams, Cal: Supreme Court 2023, https://law.justia.com/cases/california/supreme-court/2023/s268320.html


    Anton Vialtsin, Esq.
    LAWSTACHE™ LAW FIRM | Criminal Defense and Business Law
    https://lawstache.com
    (619) 357-6677

    Do you want to buy our Lawstache merchandise? Maybe a t-shirt?
    https://lawstache.com/merch/

    Want to mail me something (usually mustache related)? Send it to 185 West F Street, Suite 100-D, San Diego, CA 92101

    Want to learn about our recent victories?
    https://lawstache.com/results-notable-cases/

    If you'd like to support this channel, please consider purchasing some of the following products. We get a little kickback, and it does NOT cost you anything extra:

    *Calvin Klein Men's Dress Shirt Slim Fit Non-iron, https://amzn.to/3zm6mkf
    *Calvin Klein Men's Slim Fit Dress Pant, https://amzn.to/3G8jLQG
    *Johnson and Murphy Shoes, https://amzn.to/3KmfX0Y
    *Harley-Davidson Men's Eagle Piston Long Sleeve Crew Shirt, https://amzn.to/43gFtMC
    *Amazon Basics Tank Style Highlighters, https://amzn.to/3zwOEKZ
    *Pilot Varsity Disposable Fountain Pens, https://amzn.to/40EjSfm
    *Apple 2023 Mac Mini Desktop Computer, https://amzn.to/3Km2aGC
    *ClearSpace Plastic Storage Bins, https://amzn.to/3Kzle5q

    Are you are a Russian speaker? Вы говорите по-русски?
    https://russiansandiegoattorney.com

    Based in San Diego, CA
    Licensed: California, Nevada, and Federal Courts

    The San Diego-based business litigation and criminal defense attorneys at LAWSTACHE™ LAW FIRM are e...

    Show more Show less
    10 mins
  • Do you have to stop at the Agricultural Checkpoints? California Department of Food and Agriculture.
    Nov 6 2024

    Following denial of his suppression motion, defendant pleaded guilty to possession of marijuana for sale. Defendant had approached the Needles, California plant quarantine inspection station in a vehicle bearing Michigan license plates. The quarantine officer, feeling that a more detailed inspection was necessary, identified himself and requested to look into defendant's vehicle trunk. Defendant opened the trunk for the officer's inspection. Inside were 200 to 300 pounds of marijuana wrapped in plastic. The officer reached in and took a pinch of the substance to inspect it. He discussed the substance with defendant and they agreed that it appeared to be compost, although the officer in fact suspected that it was marijuana. The officer gave defendant a clearance slip and defendant drove away. The officer then contacted the California Highway Patrol, showed them a sample of the substance, which had fallen to the ground during the inspection of the trunk, and the Highway Patrol thereafter apprehended defendant. (Superior Court of San Bernardino County, No. VCR 517, Joseph A. Katz, Judge.)

    The Court of Appeal affirmed the conviction, holding the quarantine officers may stop motorists at inspection stations and request to look into the trunks of their vehicles without a warrant or probable cause, and that if the motorist voluntarily opens the trunk, the quarantine officer may look therein and remove any plant materials in plain view for further inspection. The court rejected defendant's suggestion that a sign should be placed at inspection stations or quarantine officers should advise motorists that they may refuse to give their consent to any search. (Opinion by Gardner, P. J., with McDaniel and Morris, JJ., concurring.)


    Read full case here: People v. Dickinson, 104 Cal. App. 3d 505, 163 Cal. Rptr. 575 (Ct. App. 1980), https://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/3d/104/505.html

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Border_Protection_Stations

    Anton Vialtsin, Esq.
    LAWSTACHE™ LAW FIRM | Criminal Defense and Business Law
    https://lawstache.com
    (619) 357-6677

    Do you want to buy our Lawstache merchandise? Maybe a t-shirt?
    https://lawstache.com/merch/

    Want to mail me something (usually mustache related)? Send it to 185 West F Street, Suite 100-D, San Diego, CA 92101

    Want to learn about our recent victories?
    https://lawstache.com/results-notable-cases/

    If you'd like to support this channel, please consider purchasing some of the following products. We get a little kickback, and it does NOT cost you anything extra:

    *Calvin Klein Men's Dress Shirt Slim Fit Non-iron, https://amzn.to/3zm6mkf
    *Calvin Klein Men's Slim Fit Dress Pant, https://amzn.to/3G8jLQG
    *Johnson and Murphy Shoes, https://amzn.to/3KmfX0Y
    *Harley-Davidson Men's Eagle Piston Long Sleeve Crew Shirt, https://amzn.to/43gFtMC
    *Amazon Basics Tank Style Highlighters, https://amzn.to/3zwOEKZ
    *Pilot Varsity Disposable Fountain Pens, https://amzn.to/40EjSfm
    *Apple 2023 Mac Mini Desktop Computer, https://amzn.to/3Km2aGC
    *ClearSpace Plastic Storage Bins, https://amzn.to/3Kzle5q

    Are you are a Russian speaker? Вы говорите по-русски?
    https://russiansandiegoattorney.com

    Based in San Diego, CA
    Licensed: California, Nevada, and Federal Courts

    The San Diego-based business litigation and criminal defense attorneys at LAWSTACHE™ LAW FIRM are e...

    Show more Show less
    14 mins

What listeners say about Collect Call with Lawstache

Average customer ratings

Reviews - Please select the tabs below to change the source of reviews.