Five Common Halloween "Crimes" (And How to Avoid Legal Issues While Still Having Fun)

Halloween is a time of revelry.  While it is a children’s holiday, it is also celebrated by adults as a (perhaps unintentional) variation of "Mardi Gras."  Large numbers of twenty-somethings and thirty-somethings take to the nightclubs, taverns, and bars in droves in search of a good time. Sometimes, the debauchery can rise to Caligulan proportions, with people drinking more heavily, indulging in the use of controlled substances and generally engaging in other risky behavior. Consequently, you can be certain that law enforcement will step up it’s presence on the streets, targeting drunk drivers, revelers, brawlers and others whom they believe to be creating a public disturbance.  Here are five common California crimes for which people are often arrested on Halloween.

1.  Driving Under the Influence | Driving With a .08 or Higher (“DUI/DWI”)

California Penal Code Section 23152(a) criminalizes driving while under the influence of an intoxicating substance, which means alcohol and/or drugs.  California Penal Code Section 23152(b), the subsection of the same vehicle code, criminalizes driving with a percentage of .08 or higher blood alcohol concentration.  

On popular holidays like Halloween, California Highway Patrol, as well as city law enforcement (Hawthorne Police Department, Los Angeles Police Department, Pasadena Police Department and other regional police) engage in “saturation patrols” where they are deployed en masse in search of drunk drivers.  Usually, a motorist who is swerving, speeding, driving erratically or otherwise violating the California Vehicle Code will catch the attention of a police officer.  After effectuating a stop, the police will make contact with the motorist.  If he or she detects bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, the “odor” of an alcoholic beverage or other indicia of intoxication, the much-dreaded DUI investigation process begins.  That means stepping out of the car and performing field sobriety tests, being arrested, taken to a “drunk tank” or simply spending the night in a jail cell, and then receiving a citation to appear in court to answer to DUI misdemeanor charges. 

However, oftentimes people whose blood alcohol level does not rise to the legal maximum (or above) are arrested on DUI.  Technically, police can arrest a person simply for driving while intoxicated if they have probable cause to believe that is the case, even without a .08 blood count! While it can make their case much more difficult in court to prove, it is not uncommon for prosecutors to charge the DWI count, expecting most people to relent and accept a plea rather than risk a conviction.  

It’s important to be cognizant of your rights.  You can legally decline the field sobriety tests.  This includes the preliminary alcohol screening test (PAS).  You do not have to answer questions that will incriminate you.  “I had a few drinks” is an incriminating remark that will end up on a police report and used against you in court.  The chemical test, of course, is another issue and you do not have a legal right to decline this exam.  A “refusal” will result in a one year driver’s license suspension. 

It’s good to be in contact with an experienced DUI attorney if you have been arrested.  And the risk of a DUI is higher on Halloween given it’s reputation for drawing motorists more likely to drink and drive on that particular night.  So be careful. 


2.  Drug-Related Offenses

In addition to drinking, many Halloween revelers take controlled substances, including, but not limited to marijuana, ecstacy (MDMA), cocaine, heroin, methamphetamines, bath salts and other drugs and/or narcotics. 

Drug offenses are generally governed by the California Health and Safety Code.  For example, California Health and Safety Code Section 11357 governs personal use of marijuana.  California Health and Safety Code Section 11352 governs sales or transportation of controlled substances.  California Health and Safety Code Section 11350 governs possession of a controlled sustance, including opiates, heroin, peyote, GHB, cocaine and other hallucinatory narcotics. 

The irony of people’s attempts to avoid DUI is that they are frequently busted in situations where they carpool, take a party bus or otherwise take collective transportation in order to avoid being a motorist on a police-saturated holiday.  The reason for these frequent busts is that one or more of the revelers will be carrying controlled substances on their person.  Oftentimes, in such situations, people are charged with what is known as “constructive” possession of narcotics even if they don’t have them on their person.  Let’s examine an example:

Dina Driver, Peter Passenger and Tina Tag-Along are driving to a nightclub in Hollywood. Dina is the “designated driver.”  Each of them are donning their provocative Halloween costumes.  Peter and Tina will be free to indulge in drinking since they will not be driving.  Unbeknownst to Dina or Peter, Tina has brought some ecstacy to really “spice things up” and make it a memorable evening.  She is carrying it in her purse.  On their way back from the club, Dina is pulled over a minor traffic violation.  However, the police officer suspects that one or more of the passengers may be carrying drugs.  The police search all three and, upon searching Tina, find the ecstacy in her purse.  The police ask her about the ecstacy and she says, “What’s the big deal? It’s Halloween. We just wanted to have some fun.”  Peter and Dina are taken aback because Tina’s comment suggests that all three were taking the substance, when, in fact, Peter and Dina did not know Tina had the drug in her possession.  All three are arrested and subsequently charged with California Health and Safety Code Section 11350 H&S.

Peter hires a San Gabriel Valley criminal defense attorney who argues that Peter was not in possession of the drug at all.  He was not in actual possession because he did not have the drug on his person.  He was not in constructive possession, either, because he did not know that Tina had ecstacy in her possession.  Peter would probably be absolved of the possession charge.  (As, in all likelihood, would Dina). 

Because people party together on Halloween, including “bar crawls” and riding in party buses, expect to hear about people being charged in like situations. 

3. Assault and Battery

Assault crimes are codified under California Penal Code Sections 240, 245(a)(1), 245(a)(2)) PC. Battery crimes California Penal Code Section 242, 243(d) and 243(e)(1) PC.

Partying can be a pleasant and enjoyable activity.  But, given the combination large numbers of people clustered together, heavy drinking and, oftentimes, the preening and posturing that occurs in the “club scene,” certain people can feel that their ego has been challenged or bruised by fellow revelers. One dirty look or glance from someone can trigger a violent reaction in some people, especially after imbibing large quantities of alcohol.  It is often how beer brawls or fights get started. 

Sure enough, all it takes is a push, shove or a punch to incur criminal liability for battery under California Penal Code Section 242.  Even taking a swing at someone can result in an arrest for assault under California Penal Code Section 240.  An assault is essentially an “attempted battery,” whereas a battery is a “completed assault.”  

The dangerous thing about these crimes is that they are “wobblers,” that is, they can be charged as felonies given the right (or, better yet, the “wrong” circumstances).  For example, if the assault or battery was committed with a deadly weapon or resulted in serious bodily harm, the defendant can be facing a violent felony charge that can result in him or her having a “strike” on his or her permanent criminal record.  A Third Strike will result in 25 to life in prison. 

All it takes is a combination of drugs, alcohol and/or a sensitive ego to result in a violent altercation or confrontation.  On a party night like Halloween, pleasant circumstances can easily become volatile and escalate into a fight between two people who rub each other the wrong way, are competing for a girl (or guy), or simply happen to glance at each other with askance.  The consequences of succumbing to one’s aggressive impulses are just not worth it. 

 4.  Weapons Offenses

As silly as it sounds, people are sometimes arrested on weapons possession charges...for a prop or accessory attached to their costume!  Perhaps you are dressed as a pirate and are carrying something eerily akin to a real knife or sword.  Or you may be dressed as a police officer and carrying a weapon made to resemble a gun...or maybe it is a real gun but is not functional.  The hypothetical situations are endless in which, technically, your costume (or a costume accessory) can land you in trouble with the law. 

Suppose the following: 

Nick dresses up as a ninja for Halloween.  He figures, to add to the verisimilitude of his costume, that it would be cool to wear ninja stars and small dagger, which are tucked into a belt so they are partially concealed but still somewhat visible.  He goes to a party with no security or anyone to prevent him entry on account of wearing these weapons.  He is having a few drinks and engaging the other guests in conversation.  His outfit is a real “ice-breaker” and he is having a great dialogue with the other people at the party.  Anxious Annie notices the ninja stars and dagger sticking out of Nick’s belt.  Annie gets nervous that Nick may use them or that they would foreseeably pose some harm to other guests.  She calls the police.  They arrive and arrest Nick for possession of these weapons. He is charged with Carrying a Concealed Weapon.

Nick’s attorney argues that he did not conceal the weapons because they were still visible (such that Annie was able to see them).  Also, he will argue that the knives he carried were not prohibited knives.  This, however, may not be a “slam dunk” argument if the ninja stars are considered “novelty knives,” which are always illegal in California. 

Although it may sound absurd, you should be careful what you wear with your costume.  If you are wearing some sort of knife, you may want to find out from a criminal defense attorney if it is a “prohibited knife.”  In spite of your innocent motives, you may be running afoul of California’s knife laws.  If you are arrested or charged with their possession, a criminal defense attorney will have to evaluate your facts to see if you have a defense that can absolve you of illegal knife possession charges. 

Sexy Halloween costumes have become a staple of
American Halloween Partying.

5.  Disturbing the Peace

Under California Penal Code Section 415 PC, you may be found guilty of “disturbing the peace” in any number of circumstances, including illegally fighting or challenging someone to fight in a public place, perturbing others with loud and unreasonable noises or using offense or vituperative words in public.  As you can imagine, this will oftentimes happen in the context of loud parties or clubs and drunken guests, especially on a holiday (like Halloween) that produces boisterous and rambunctious festivities.

Halloween can be an extremely enjoyable and fun time to really “let your hair down” and express yourself with your costume.  But it is still good to be mindful of the pitfalls that can come with being reckless with your alcohol consumption or behavior.  

If you or anyone you know is arrested on Halloween or any other day or occasion, the Coimbra Law Office has the experience, knowledge and skill to successfully challenge your criminal or DUI case.  You can reach our San Gabriel Valley Criminal Defense Law Firm and San Gabriel Valley DUI Law Firm at 1-855-325-5245 or by e-mail.  Free consultation may be available.

Nothing in this article or anywhere on this blog constitutes legal advice of any kind. Pictures above are featured for illustrative purposes only and are no reflection on the persons depicted whatsoever.  Attorney licensed in the State of California and, therefore, accepts California cases only.

Five Things About California Gun Law That Might Surprise You

California is known to have some of the most restrictive gun laws in the United States. Many Second Amendment advocates lambaste the California legislature for having unfairly encroached on citizens' gun rights. However, California firearms law is not so black-and-white. There are some surprising nuances.  

1. No Open Carry

Unlike other states, California is not an “Open Carry” state.  It used to be legal to openly carry a firearm...until the California legislature passed Assembly Bill 144 (codified as California Penal Code Section 26350.2 PC).  The date in which this open carry ban went into effect was January 1st, 2012.  Previous to that date, anybody could lawfully have had an unloaded firearm, on their person, in public. Thus, openly carrying either loaded or unloaded firearms is now a crime in California.

2. “Stand Your Ground” in California? 

With so much national hoopla regarding the George Zimmerman case and the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, many Californians have wondered: “do we have ‘stand-your-ground’ in this state?”

There is no legislatively codified “Stand Your Ground” law in California that explicitly a enunciates a “no retreat” policy or “castle doctrine.”  However, the common law (that is, case law) tells us that there a person may use deadly force against another who is threatening imminent death or great bodily injury.  Granted, you cannot use more force than is reasonably necessary to stave off the threat.  But, if the threat rises to the level of prospective fatality or severe bodily harm, one may use that force (which is commensurate with the threat) to thwart the attack.  In essence, this is California “self-defense.” 

The only qualifier appears to be that convicted felons who possess firearms do not have this right. In the first place, they are not entitled to possess firearms.  But it appears, from the case law, that this qualifier only attaches where the accused has actually been charged with being a “felon in possession of a firearm.”

Other than that, doesn’t sound too different from Florida’s controversial “Stand Your Ground,” does it? 

3. California Concealed Weapons Permit 

Contrary to popular belief, California does allow certain individuals to carry firearms in a concealed manner.  However, such persons require a “Concealed Weapons Permit.”  Let’s look at the requirements to be eligible for one:

a) The applicant must be of “good moral character;”

b) the applicant must be either (i) a resident in the county or a city in a county or (ii) spend a substantial portion of his or her time at his or her place of employment or business that is situated in a county or a city in a county; 

c) have good cause to warrant the grant of a permit;

d) have finished a certified/approved firearms training program.

“Good cause” can be established if the applicant demonstrates that:

1) there is a “clear and present danger” to the applicant’s person or immediate family; and

2) if the applicant is allowed to carry a concealed weapon, this would alleviate any such danger.

Judges, criminal defense attorneys, prosecutors, process servers and private investigators are more readily eligible for a concealed weapons permit given the potentiality of interacting with potentially dangerous individuals. 

4.  Felons Can’t Own, Possess, Buy, Sell or Receive Guns

If you are a convicted felon, are a narcotic drug addict, or have been convicted of certain misdemeanors (certain sex offenses, “assault with a deadly weapon,” etc.), you are legally barred from having a firearm.  Cal. Pen. Code Section 29800 PC.  This includes carrying, owning, being in possession of, purchasing or being in receipt of a firearm.  While gun rights can be restored in certain situations, there are suspension periods that can last from 10 years to life.  

5. You Need a Valid Permit to Lease, Sell or Transfer Firearms. Period. 

Unless you have a valid permit, or fall into a certain category (law enforcement officer, disposing gun you inherited, transferring guns at a gun show but do so infrequently, or in certain other situations), you simply cannot transfer, lease or sell a firearm.  

California firearms law and guns law can be extremely intricate and complex. Our San Gabriel Valley Criminal Defense Law Firm is highly versed and equipped with the knowledge and skill it takes to defend your Second Amendment rights.  If you have been charged with a gun crime, contact us at 1-855-FUK-JAIL (1-855-385-5245) or visit us at CoimbraLaw.com.  Free consultations available.

Caveat: Nothing in this article or anywhere on this blog constitutes legal advice of any kind. Picture above is featured for illustrative purposes only and is no reflection on the person depicted whatsoever.  Attorney licensed in the State of California and, therefore, accepts California cases only.

Five Ways Posting on Facebook or Twitter Can Land You in a World of Hurt

By #CoimbraLaw California Social Media Lawyers 

It seems there is almost nothing people will refrain from revealing about their personal lives on Facebook.  While it can be cathartic to use social media as your personal journal, it can also be dangerous and subject you to legal liability if you are reckless.  And because it provides a platform for potentially hundreds or thousands of people to view you, it can also appeal to the worst human impulses, including egotism and narcissistic behavior.  It can evoke strong emotions where conflict is involved, which can escalate into criminal or civil malfeasance. Here are some examples of social media content you may want to think twice about posting.

Making Criminal Threats

To prove that you are guilty of having made a criminal threat, the prosecutor must prove that:

a.  You willfully threatened to (unlawfully) kill or inflict great bodily harm on another person;

b.  You communicated the threat to the alleged victim (in oral or written fashion, including digital, electronic, etc.);

c.  It was your intention that the statement be understood to be a threat;

d.  The alleged threat was so unambiguous, clear, immediate, unconditional, and specific as to convey a serious intention and the impending possibility that the threat would be carried out;

e.  The threat actually caused the alleged victim to be in sustained fear for his or her own safety;

f.  The alleged victim’s fear was reasonable under the circumstances.

Criminal threats are criminalized under California Penal Code Section 422 PC. 

Making Admissions that Make You Civilly Liable

Let’s assume the following example:

Nosy Nick and Ida Inadvertent are involved in a car accident on a busy street.  Nick gets out of the car and inspects the damage on his vehicle.  Ida exclaims, “You should be more careful when you drive! Look what you did to my car!”  Nick is astonished because he could have sworn it was Ida’s fault since she sideswiped him while he was simply driving and minding his own business.  The two exchange insurance information.  Ida abrasively insists that it is Nick’s fault and he will have to pay for the damage.  He responds, “We’ll see about that.”  The two part ways. 

When Nick gets home, he turns on his computer and runs a Facebook search of Ida Inadvertent.  Her profile appears and her Facebook wall is visible to the public.  Ida’s latest post reads: “I’m so pissed.  I just hit this dude.  My phone blew up, I looked down and before I knew it, I took out his fender. [Expletive].”  Nick prints the information and saves it. He calls the insurance company to report the accident. 

Some days go by and he hears from his insurance representative.  Ida’s version of the events (as she relayed them to her insurance company) were completely different from her Facebook wall posting.  In fact, she charges that Nick hit her and, thus, is at fault.  The damage on both vehicles is such that it is not clear who was at fault.  Nick e-mails his insurance representative the wall posting from Ida's Facebook profile admitting that she was at fault. The insurance representatives for Nick and Ida ultimately both determine Ida was at fault.  

This is not an uncommon occurrence.  And personal injury is not the only context in which this occurs.  Many people use Facebook and other social media as a journal of their innermost thoughts and feelings and impulsively publicize admissions or confessions to actions for which they may be civilly liable.  By so doing, they are providing evidence that a civil opponent can use against them. 

According to California Evidence Code Section 1200(a), hearsay is a statement, made outside of court, that is offered to prove that a particular matter is true.  Hearsay is, generally, inadmissible.  The case authority and other legal literature explain that hearsay suffers certain “infirmities” that make it inherently unreliable. However, like many other laws and rules, there are exceptions available.  One such exception to the Hearsay Rule is “Admission by Party Opponent.” According to California Evidence Code section 1220, evidence of a statement made by an opponent in a legal action can be offered up against him or her.  Obviously, the admission of guilt that Ida posted on Facebook would fall under this exception. 

Making Defamatory Statements

Issuing insulting invectives and vitriolic remarks against someone in social media or online is certainly nothing new.  It is frequently referred to as “trolling.”  However, statements otherwise protected by the First Amendment (regardless of their vituperative character) can cross the line into defamatory statements in certain situations.  You can be sued for defamation if you:

1) publicized to a third party

2) a statement of fact (as opposed to an opinion) that is false

3) that can be construed as 

a) regarding the plaintiff; and

b) which has the tendency to injure the plaintiff’s reputation.

Now, if the plaintiff is a “public figure,” under a famous case entitled New York Times v. Sullivan, the plaintiff has to prove what is called “actual malice,” which means the statement was made with a “reckless disregard for the truth.”  It is an elevated standard of proof meant to protect your First Amendment to utter open criticism about a public figure or issue and to foster, generally, the “marketplace of ideas.”  However, uttering a false remark about a private person when you know that remark to be false and can harm that party’s reputation can make you civilly liable.

Engaging in Copyright Infringement

In this age of “DYI” (“do it yourself”) videos and other multi-media, using copyrighted media for which you have no license or licensing rights can trigger civil liability under the US Copyright Laws.  With software that can easily detect duplicate text or language, it is easier than ever to detect whether someone else is plagiarizing your written content or using something you created without your consent.  Plagiarizing content or lifting multimedia without the proper consent can incur civil liability. 

Bragging About or Revealing Criminal Behavior

In their youthful bravado, many young people like to brag about their exploits.  However, many of these indulgences are drug-related or reveal some other criminality.  Be it a theft-related crime, sex offense, posing with illegal firearms, underage drinking, posing with drug paraphernalia (bong, meth pipe, etc.) or some other illicit behavior, you can be sure the watchful eye of law enforcement is not far away.  Law enforcement agencies have officers and personnel who monitor social media and scan for criminal conduct.  Don’t be surprised if you end up with a letter from a detective if you posted a picture or wall post where you engaged in criminal behavior or owned up to it.






In a Bind? Our Los Angeles Social Media Lawyers Can Help You  

With regard to social media civil or criminal liability, the Coimbra Law Firm (San Gabriel Valley social media law firm) represents persons in the following situations:

- Prosecuting a restraining order against a party for harassing you online;

- Defending against a restraining order for alleged online harassment;

- Criminal Defense against a misdemeanor or felony charge, including, but not limited to cyberbullying, criminal threats, stalking, etc.; 

- Prosecuting a civil action against a person who has wrongfully accused you of a criminal or civil malfeasance (“Malicious Prosecution,” “Defamation,” “Abuse of Process”);

Our Los Angeles social media law firm is extremely aggressive and thorough in representing our clients. 

If you believe you are being investigated for a crime related to social media or you have an issue regarding civil liability for something you did on social media, you can reach our Los Angeles criminal defense law firm and Los Angeles tort law firm at 1-855-325-5245 or Esquire@CoimbraLaw.com.  Free consultation may be available.

Nothing in this article or anywhere on this blog constitutes legal advice of any kind. Picture above is featured for illustrative purposes only and is no reflection on the person depicted whatsoever.  Attorney licensed in the State of California and, therefore, accepts California cases only. 

How Your Boss May Be Cheating You Out of Overtime (and Other Compensation): The “Independent Contractor” Trap

By Lorgio Coimbra, Esq.

In these precarious economic times, California workers are slaving away, working extremely hard to make ends meet.  They can use every nickel and dime they can get. Instead, many workers are getting "nickeled and dimed” by employers who, deliberately or otherwise, misclassify their workers. The benefits of misclassifying their employees include not having to pay payroll taxes, not having to provide meal periods and rest breaks, and, otherwise, not having to incur the sundry expenses associated with keeping an employee.  The one who loses out, of course, is you, the worker, who would otherwise benefit from California’s wage and hour laws.  Here’s a test to determine whether you fall in the column of “employee” rather than “independent contractor” and, therefore, to ascertain whether you’ve been deprived overtime pay and other benefits required of employers under California law. 



Imagine this: You’ve been hired by a company or organization.  You think you’ve landed the dream job, or, at minimum, something steady that will help pay your bills and sustain you for the foreseeable future.  You work very hard your first two weeks and you are given your first paycheck.  You don’t see any paystub, wage statement or other indication that payroll taxes have been paid or any amount withheld for Social Security or Medicare. You don’t think much of it. In fact, you like that those things are not being deducted. You enjoy your job and you “suck it up.” You start putting in late hours and you notice your pay doesn’t increase as the overtime goes up. As time goes on, that you are working during what should be your lunch break. You are not given (or are seldom given) rest breaks. Tax season rolls around and you are stuck with a giant self-employment tax bill.  You are shocked: you are not “self-employed;” you’re working for your boss.  You see an attorney. The calculations are made and it’s determined that you are owed thousands, perhaps tens of thousands in back overtime pay. What do you do?

No one, set definition exists for the designation “overtime worker.”  So it’s necessary to look at how courts and enforcement agencies look at a particular scenario to see if a worker is either an employee or independent contractor.

Where handling a matter where employment status is at issue, the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (or DSLE) presumes that you are an employee.  The presumption, however, is “rebuttable;” that means your employer can present evidence to the contrary, therefore defeating that presumption.   The actual determination of whether you are an independent contractor or an employee depends upon a number of variables, all of which must be taken into account.  No one factor controls this determination.   As a consequence, it’s necessary to thoroughly examine the facts of each worker-boss relationship.  Then, the law is applied to those facts.

The DLSE uses a “multi-factor” or “economic realities” test (adopted by the California Supreme Court in S. G. Borello & Sons, Inc. v Dept. of Industrial Relations (1989) 48 Cal.3d 341).  In applying this test, the most substantial factor to be considered is whether your employer, that is, the person or entity to whom the service is rendered, has control (or the right to control) you as regards (a) the work done and (b) how the work is to be performed (“manner and means”). There are additional factors that may be taken into account, depending on the issue involved.  These are:

1. Whether you, the person performing the services, is engaged in a business or occupation that is different or distinct from that of your boss;

2. Whether or not the work is a part of your boss’s regular business;

3. Whether it’s you or your boss who supply the tools, instrumentalities and work place for you to perform the job duties or tasks;

4. Your investment, if any, in the materials or equipment needed to complete these tasks;

5. Whether the service rendered necessitates a special skill;

6. The type of occupation: in other words, whether the kind of job duties you are fulfilling require the supervision by your boss.  Said another way, whether the type of work you do is usually performed under the direction of the employer or can be done by a specialist without direction or supervision.

7. Your opportunity for profit or loss depending on your boss’s managerial skill;

8. The length of time that is takes to carry out the services;

9. Whether the working relationship is permanent or temporary;

10. Whether you are paid by the clock or by the job;

11. Though not determinative, whether or not you and your boss believed you were creating an employer-employee relationship at the outset.

It’s important to note that, even where your boss does not control or supervise your work details, an employer-employee relationship can still be found if (a) your boss retains constant control over the operations (as a whole), (b) whether your job duties are an integral part of said operation; and (c) whether the nature of the work you are performing makes detailed supervision and control necessary.

If you believe this test would determine that you are an employee, as opposed to the independent contractor status to which you’ve been relegated, and you’ve put in overtime for which you believe you have not been paid, the Coimbra Law Office is available at 1-855-IH8-BOSS (855-448-2677).

Nothing in the aforementioned should be interpreted to be legal advice or should be construed that way.  Every case is different and requires individual evaluation. 

Lorgio Coimbra is a no-holds barred employment law attorney.  The Coimbra Law Office vociferously advocates for workers who have been denied overtime pay, meal breaks and rest periods, have not been compensated for business-related expenses, and have suffered other grievances and damages by their employers.   

Five Ways to Party Safe and Avoid a DUI Conviction (Even If You’ve Been Pulled Over)

By Lorgio Coimbra

The consequences of a DUI conviction can be devastating and can reverberate throughout your life for years to come.  You may face incarceration, pay extremely hefty court fines, pay legal costs, pay raised insurance premiums for the next ten (10) years, and have to face the other vast and sundry collateral consequences of a DUI conviction.  If you go to trial, you may face the wrath of an unforgiving jury.  So isn’t it best to avoid one altogether? Easier said than done, right? Here are some ways to party (safe and responsibly) but avoid a DUI conviction, even if the police have pulled you over on suspicion of drunk driving.

           

1.  Ditch the Designated Driver; Hire a Car Service or Taxi Cab Instead

If You’re the Designated Driver
Time and again, I have represented DUI defendants....who were designated to abstain from alcohol and drive for their friends!  While the idea of a designated driver, in and of itself, is well-intended, it can be unrealistic.  The indirect peer pressure from your friends (whom you see drinking and having a good time) and the “club ambiance” of your party destination may make it difficult to muster up the will power to say “no” to alcohol, especially if there is a generous drink purchaser among your friends.  Also, given California’s “zero tolerance policy” against drunk driving, even one or two drinks may register as sufficiently high enough (0.08% of your blood alcohol concentration or “BAC”) for a driver to be arrested and charged with DUI under California Penal Code Section 23152(b)(Driving with .08 or higher BAC). Even if the designated driver is, for all intents and purposes, sober (or the “more sober” one in the group), it means little if he or she gets pulled over after having one or two drinks.  On a Friday or Saturday night, the slightest swerve or aberrant driving behavior can attract the vigilant eyes of watchful police patrols, which abound in Hollywood, Downtown Pasadena, Downtown Los Angeles and other common party areas on those nights.

If Someone Else Is
Even if you are not the designated driver, and, therefore, not responsible for a DUI arrest and conviction (since you’re simply the passenger), you can still be charged with Public Intoxication under California Penal Code Section 647(b) PC.  The prosecutor need only demonstrate that you were intoxicated enough to obstruct, interfere with or prevent others from using the sidewalks, streets or other public ways.  And there is generally no breath testing to arrest or cite you with public intoxication. In other words, it's the cop's word against yours.  So if your designated driver was pulled over, the police may still inquire if you had anything to drink if you are a passenger in the car.  If you appear inebriated, it is likely you may be charged with public intoxication.

Were you really “obstructing...a public way” by being the passenger in a vehicle that was pulled over? The case is probably defensible.  But you still have to appear in court to answer for the charge. And pay a lawyer to defend you. And you may still be convicted if you lose at jury trial.  Better to avoid the headache, right?

The best “insurance” is probably hiring a taxi cab or a car service.  Even the cost of a few hundred dollars for a taxi cab or other professional driving service will pale in comparison to the legal costs associated with drunk driving or public intoxication. Also, for your safety and the safety of others, the wisest course of action is to have someone who has had absolutely nothing to drink (and we can, usually, correctly assume that a taxi cab driver or other such chauffeur is completely sober at the time).

Know Your Rights (You’ll Need Them If You’ve Already Been Pulled Over)

2.  Learn to Say No To a Police Officer: Don’t Admit Anything  

Imagine this: You and a group of friends decide to frequent a bar, nightclub, strip club or other establishment serving drinks.  You “only have a couple” and get back on the road.  You are pulled over.  You are sitting there in your vehicle with the patrol car lights shining bright in your rearview mirror.  The police officer approaches and asks you, “have you had anything to drink tonight?” What do you say?

Under the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution, and the abundant case law that’s come after which addresses the subject of self-incrimination, you are not obligated to say anything that could incriminate you. You have the right not to testify against yourself.  Most people like to be candid and open, or think they can obtain leniency from the cop by stating the honest and seemingly not-so-incriminating truth: “I had two beers.”  “I had one margarita.”  “I only had one.”

Whatever your answer is, it will end up on a police report and your lawyer will have an opportunity to read it in court after you’ve been arraigned on a DUI charge.  The prosecutor will use your admission of drinking against you.  Even if you had one or two drinks, you have just owned up to drinking.

The better answer is probably, “I have nothing to say.” The likelihood of getting arrested after being pulled over on suspicion of DUI is generally high to certain, anyway.  Why make matters worse by helping the prosecutor’s case against you?  Even if you are arrested, you can help avoid your own conviction in court.

The police officer will usually write, in his police report, that he smelled the “odor of alcohol emitting” from your vehicle.  Or some other boilerplate, stock language that makes you look like a drunk driver.  Might as well exercise your Fifth Amendment and not give him the rope to hang you with by giving an incriminating answer.

3.  The Field Sobriety Test: Think You Can Dazzle the Officer With Your Performance and Avoid Arrest? Think Again.

Now imagine this: You and a group of friends decide to frequent a salsa establishment. You were enthralled with the club (and the hot girls (or guys) you met, the drinks you had, etc.) and you are chatting with your friends about your experience while to another party destination or driving home.  The dreaded “whoop” of a police patrol car thunders in the background. Your heart starts beating fast, crippled with fear. You pull over, terrified that you are going to be made to perform a Field Sobriety Test (FST).  Because you drank, you suspect you will fail (even though sober people fail it, too).  The police officer asks you to perform the FST. What do you do?

The general response from a driver is to perform the FST.  Most drivers, however, don’t realize that they are not legally obligated or required to perform the field sobriety test. Unlike a chemical test (blood or breath taken at a police station), you are not required to perform (and face no legal penalties from) refusing a field sobriety test. Field sobriety tests, unfortunately, are built for failure and even the slightest deviation from the police officer’s instructions (or most minute imperfection in your performance) will incriminate you on the field and, subsequently, in court (with the prosecutor’s DUI case against you).  Again, if you’ve been pulled over on DUI suspicion in California, the police officer will likely arrest you whether or not you have performed the FST. So it is the wiser course of action to (politely) decline to take it.

(Now, here is one big caveat: Under California’s implied consent law, by virtue of obtaining your California driver’s license, you have (impliedly) agreed to submit yourself to a chemical test of your breath or blood (or urine for DUI of drugs) if you have been lawfully arrested.  So, if you have been arrested and are asked to take a chemical test, you do not have the right to decline.  And if you do refuse the chemical test, you will be subjected to one year license suspension if the DMV has found that your refusal was willful).
 

                      

4.  Know Your Limitations 

It’s important to be realistic in terms of what you can drink and how much you can drink.  If you’re a small frame, lighter-weight person, you probably should reconsider "doing shots."  As the saying goes, “one Tequila, two Tequila, three Tequila, FLOOR.”  This will help you avoid the legal repercussions that come with public intoxication or driving under the influence of alcohol (not to mention one hell of a hangover).

5.  Remember This Number: 1-855-FUK-JAIL

Or, in it’s purely numerical order, 1-855-385-5245.  That’s the number to the Coimbra Law Office, a DUI law firm in the San Gabriel Valley which provides powerful, effective and affordable legal representation to people who have been arrested for DUI all throughout Southern California, including Los Angeles, Ventura County and Orange County.  You can contact us anytime of day or night.  Forgive the slight crudeness of the number, but when you’re panicked because you’ve been arrested for DUI, the only important thing is to know the number to a good lawyer and to quickly remember it.  And what better way than to have this easy-to remember number at your disposal? 1-855-FUK-JAIL.

After all, who needs jail? “F–k jail!”

Nothing in this article or anywhere on this site is intended to be or should be interpreted as legal advice or counsel.  No promises or guarantees made.  Each case is different and subject to individual evaluation by a licensed attorney.  

Are Corporations Swallowing Up America? Knowing Your Legal Rights in the Age of Corporate Supremacy

By Lorgio Coimbra

Everywhere we go, it seems we are suffocating under the weight of rampant, overarching corporate power. The infamous 'Citizens United' case has allowed giant corporations to essentially purchase elections by, for example, spending unlimited amounts of money to influence an increasingly gullible voting populace with misleading advertisements. Starting with Ronald Reagan’s deregulation scheme in the 1980's and consistent lobbying efforts since, large corporations have been able to weaken important consumer and worker protections and, therefore, elude accountability.   

On a more day-to-day, practical scale, we all feel the repercussions of the influence that corporations have acquired through faulty legislation and jurisprudence.  Whether it’s hidden bank fees, abusive and exploitative bosses, or being charged in excess for a good or service than what was advertised, the life of the average American is adversely affected by corporate power on a frequent basis.

Sometimes, government seems helpless to protect consumers in the face of private abuses of power by large companies whose massive wealth and legal protection seem to render them invincible.  Fortunately, California consumers and employees still have a bevy of legal rights
to combat these corporate abuses of power.

THE MARKETPLACE

Have you Been Ripped off by Auto Mechanic, Dealership, Store, Other Establishment? 

We have all felt deceived or taken advantage of, at one point or another, by a vendor, store, shop or other business establishment.  For example, as you were driving down a street, you may have seen an auto mechanic with a sign outside of his shop that advertised an oil change or other service for a nominal, flat fee.  Believing that the advertised low fee was as represented, you may have taken your car for repairs, only to receive a bill stating additional charges about which you were never warned.

If you have been the victim of hidden fees in other situations, as well, such as your life insurance policy, health insurance policy, a financial or brokerage firms, your gym club membership, your internet memberships or service, your cable television, some other monthly subscription service,
you may have an actionable claim.

If you have patronized a business as a result of it’s deceptive or false advertising, “bait-and-switch” tactics or out-and-out misrepresentation, you may be able to recover a money award under the California Consumers Legal Remedies Act, or “CLRA.”

What is the Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA)?

The Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) is a law in California that allows consumers to seek legal remedies for deceptive or misleading advertising or other unfair business practices. Some unfair practices addressed by the CLRA include

– Advertising goods with the intent to not to sell them as advertised;

- Using deceptive designations or representations of geographic origin in relation to goods or services (for example, representing a product is “Made in the USA” when, in fact, it is made overseas, i..e, made in China.).

– Representing that goods are new or original, when, in fact they have deteriorated unreasonably or have been refurbished, revamped or reconditioned, or are simply used or secondhand items.

– Advertising furniture but failing to clearly indicate that the item is unassembled if that is the case.

– Representing that a repair, replacement or part is necessary when it is not

– Incorporating an unconscionable provision into a contract.

You may also be able to recover restitution for your loss and injunctive relief under the “Unfair Practices” Act (Business and Professions Code Section 17200 B&P) if an establishment is guilty of one of the following:

– perpetrating an unlawful business act or practice;

– engaging in an unfair business act or practice;

– engaging in a fraudulent business act or practice;

– using unfair, deceptive, untrue or misleading advertising.

THE WORKPLACE

As a worker in California, you are fortunate enough to be protected by an expansive scheme of state and federal worker protections and laws.  Here are just a few such worker protections:

The Misclassification Game

Oftentimes, employers classify their workers as “independent contractors” in order to skimp out on paying overtime, employment taxes, social security tax and other expenses associated with hiring and maintaining an employee.  The problem arises when the job duties of supposed independent contractor resemble or constitute those of an employee.  For example, a worker should be classified as an employee if he or she has been assigned certain tasks or work duties and has  received instructions as to how to carry out those tasks, has been given little no to autonomy, and uses the employer company’s supplies and equipment to carry out those duties.  But even where the employer has not exercised control over those work details, an employer-employee relationship can still be found if  (a) the employer maintains “pervasive control” over the operation (as a whole), (b) the worker’s job duties are an integral part of the employer’s operations, and (c) the nature of the work duties makes it unnecessary for the employer to exercise detailed control over their performance and completion.

The net result is that the employee may be entitled to overtime pay going back four years.  If more than one employee suffered this misclassification and, therefore, deprivation of overtime pay, the workers can file what is known as a “class action” to pursue the employer in one lawsuit.

Other rights 

Employees also have rights with respect to pregnancy and medical conditions which may require them to take leave under the FMLA (Family Medial Leave Act) and FEHA (Fair Employment and Housing Act). You cannot simply be let go simply because you were diagnosed with an illness or disease.  Failure to provide you with a reasonable accommodation for your illness may result in the substantial civil liability.

You are also entitled to be compensated for expenses related to the carrying out of your job duties.  Failure to do so may be a violation of the California Labor Code and entitle you to legal action for compensation. Your attorney may recover attorney’s fees for enforcing the action.

ABUSIVE CREDITORS

Since the economic downturn in 2008, millions of Americans have suffered unemployment and other financial losses that have caused them to default on their home loans, student loans, credit cards and other financial obligations.  Creditors often employ the use of debt collection agencies to seek to recuperate what they can from the debtor.  However, many agencies cross the line from lawful debt collection to outright harassment, engaging in repeated calling, haranguing and harassment, even personally confronting debtors to extract pay.  Fortunately, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act provides protections to consumers:

The Act prohibits certain types of “abusive and deceptive” behavior when attempting to collect a debt, including the following:

– A debt collector cannot contact you by telephone outside of the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. local time.

– A debt collector must cease communication with you upon request.  The collector cannot communicate with the debtor in any way (other than litigation) after the debtor has issued written notice that he or she wishes no further communication or that he or she refuses to pay the alleged debt

– A debt collector cannot cause the telephone to ring incessantly. He  cannot engage any person in telephone conversation continuously or repeatedly with the intent to abuse, annoy or harass the debtor or any person at the phone number;

Other prohibited conduct includes:

– Communicating with debtors at their place of employment after having been advised that such calls are prohibited by the employer;

– Contacting a debtor known to be represented by an attorney;

– Misrepresentation or deceit: misrepresenting the debt or employing deception to collect the debt, including a debt collector’s misrepresentation that he or she is an attorney or a law enforcement officer

Bottom Line

No matter how corporate abuse of power manifests itself in your daily life, take some comfort in the fact that laws exist to vindicate your rights.  A lawyer (an employment lawyer, consumer rights attorney, etc). who is knowledgeable in the field in which you have found yourself victimized can help you seek restitution and, in many cases, a substantial money award for your loss and damages.

Corporations have amassed an unbelievable amount of power in Washington
D.C. and in state legislatures.  They have undermined legal protections for
workers and  consumers.  Luckily, many state and federal laws exist which
continue to vindicate plaintiff's rights if they have been injured or defrauded by
companies, vendors, employers and other business establishments.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

Disclaimer: Nothing in this article or anywhere on this blog constitutes legal advice nor should be interpreted as such.  This article does not constitute, nor should it be construed as, an advertisement or solicitation for services.  The Coimbra Law Office reserves the right to refuse representation to any person for any reason. The Coimbra Law Office will conduct general intake and/or evaluation and, in his sole discretion, Mr. Coimbra will accept or decline a case. Mr. Coimbra is licensed the State of California.  

The Coimbra Law Firm is a full-service law practice with an emphasis on civil litigation.  Whether it’s defending persons facing lawsuits for defaulting on credit cards or student loans, or prosecuting a civil case on behalf of wronged workers, the Coimbra Law Office prides itself on efficient, vigorous and passionate representation. Regardless of your situation, the Coimbra Law Office is just a phone call away: 1-855-325-5245.  Or you can send an e-mail at CoimbraLaw@Yahoo.com.  

Like Rats: Deluge of Non-Lawyer "Immigration Consultants", "Notarios,"and Con-Men Expected To Come Out of the Woodwork Before and AfterImmigration Reform Passage

By Lorgio Coimbra

As the passage of historic immigration reform nears, “wolves in sheep’s clothing” known as “notarios” and other non-lawyers (claiming to be able to help undocumented immigrants obtain permanent residence) will surface like an infestation of rats or termites.  Don’t be fooled.  Unless licensed to practice law, these people are incapable of rendering legal representation.  They do not have legal training. This article is not meant as a criticism of any legitimate enterprises that engage in non-legal help, such as translation of documents.  This article is meant to highlight those entities which have crossed the line from rendering legitimate assistance to practicing law without a license, which is a criminal offense. And the only ones who get hurt in the end (in some instances, to the point of ending up with deportation orders) are unsuspecting consumers.

You've all seen or heard the news: Immigration Reform is imminent.  It is unknown exactly when legislation will be ready for the President's signature, with the current Reform bill expected to experience delays in the Republican-controlled House. But some measure of reform appears to be imminent or to come to fruition in the near future.

Even before a bill has passed, however, many confidence men and non-attorneys who pass themselves off as quasi-legal representatives, are advertising their "services" to the immigrant community.  Many consumers, who are either not savvy or simply choose to ignore warnings, are at risk of being victims of "notario fraud."  Notarios will often charge even more than an attorney, which completely defeats the purpose of hiring a notario (being that the primary reason for avoiding a lawyer are the supposed higher rates).  Yet, notario victims will oftentimes have to cough up additional money to hire a real lawyer to clean up the mess left behind by a non-attorney who did not have the skill or legal credential to represent the consumer. However, if important deadlines have been ignored, requests for evidence have gone unanswered or some other harmful neglect has occurred due to the legal ignorance of “notarios,” even an experienced lawyer may be unable to undo the harm.

What kind of harm can a Notario do?

After taking fees from unsuspecting clients, notarios will often fill out and file official government documents (a potential violation of the law given that filling out and submitting such documents could constitute unlawful practice of law) with the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).  Notarios will file the documents, oftentimes making glaring errors, forgetting to attach important documents or otherwise committing some egregious error, only to receive a request for evidence issued against the client.  More likely than not, the notario will fail to provide an answer to such request. (And, legally, his hands are tied from doing so, anyway).

Many times, the petitions and applications such "consultants" file are on behalf of undocumented immigrants with no hope of immigration relief. Before an experienced immigration lawyer takes on representing a client, he diligently inquires as to the client's background, how he entered the country, how long he or she has been in the country, his or her current status, and other questions aimed at ascertaining whether they even qualify for a particular form of relief.  Notarios have no such training, take no such precautions and engage in no such inquiry or research.  When the USCIS gets the documents and their officials realize the absence of legal grounds for immigration relief, they will either send out a request for evidence (to verify certain documentation, for example, proof of lawful entry into the United States) or simply out a denial.  If the request for evidence goes unanswered or improperly answered, the petition or application can be denied.  The denial may ultimately trigger a referral to the immigration court, where the applicant is placed in removal proceedings. Since the notario cannot represent the client in immigration court, oftentimes, neither the client nor any lawful representative will show up at the hearing.  The immigration judge will then deport the misfortunate applicant “in absentia” (without his or her presence), which could, potentially, result in a "lifetime ban" from re-entering the United States.  

By the time the client realizes this and goes to an immigration lawyer, often it is too late.  Perhaps a motion for reconsideration or motion to reopen can be filed, but the judge has the discretion to approve or deny it.  To boot, there must exist legal grounds for the motion to be filed.  Even then, the arguments must be persuasive enough to convince the judge to grant the motion.  Moreover, appeals to higher courts (such as the Board of Immigration Appeals or the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals) can be extremely, even prohibitively, expensive and fruitless.

Much of this can be prevented with simple caution and simply refusing to patronize the services of a person putting himself or herself out as an “immigration helper” or “immigration consultant" who has no license to practice law.   

“What should I watch out for?”

In view of the coming Immigration Reform, likely to pass this year or the next, you can expect tens of thousands of non-licensed individuals and entities to advertise as “immigration consultants”, “paralegals” or “immigration helpers.” Watch out for these buzzwords.  In reality, these are often just euphemisms for “no license to practice law.”  

This is not to say that there are no such thing as legitimate immigration consultants, that is, persons who are tasked with translating documents or providing other low-level, non-legal assistance.  However, that is the extent to which such consultants can “help” petitioners and applicants. Non-lawyers cannot represent persons before the Immigration Court (except in extremely limited circumstances, that is, a “reputable individuals” who cannot charge any fee whatsoever). Non-attorneys cannot represent persons before the federal authorities, such as the USCIS.  Answering questions on forms and instructing clients on their responses constitute legal advice, which only attorneys can issue or persons working under the close supervision of an attorney. 

Other red flags include advertisements which make outlandish promises or guarantees of a desired outcome.  Many notarios are now asking consumers to pay in advance of the passage of Immigration Reform Bill!  Notarios will often ask them to pay to be placed on a waiting list so they can get to the front of the line. Obviously, this is a complete fraud and meant to bamboozle unsuspecting consumers.  

You should always ask the person whether or she has a license to practice law.  A lawyer will be more than happy to show you his or her credentials, i.e., license to practice law, “bar card,” diploma or other indicia of his or her ability to exercise the profession.  A notario will be evasive and circuitous.  Sometimes, however, notarios may lie and create the illusion or front of a law office.  Again, it is important to ask for qualifications and credentials.  

You can report a notario to the authorities. The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) has even created a website to address this problem: StopNotarioFraud.org.

Don’t (or don't let your loved one) be a notario victim for the sake of “saving a few bucks.” It’s not worth the terrible consequences that can ensue.  It is not uncommon for notarios to charge even more than an attorney.  Ultimately, you will probably have to hire a real lawyer to clean up the mess, which means you will be paying twice: the notario and the lawyer. If finances are a concern, many attorneys will take payment plans and/or charge very affordable rates.  Don’t sacrifice your future. Hire a real attorney. And a skilled and experienced one at that. 

What about a lawyer with little or no immigration experience?

Frankly, if he or she does not have ample immigration experience, a lawyer who has not previously effectively handled immigration cases is not worth hiring.  Immigration law is extremely complicated and intricate.  It requires the meticulous representation of an experienced and savvy immigration lawyer.  While even inexperienced lawyers can, technically represent, your immigration interests, they may end up doing just as much harm as a "notario" through sheer incompetence.  

Disclaimer: Nothing in this article or anywhere on this blog constitutes or should be interepreted as legal advice or counsel.  This article does not, in any way, shape or form, intend to besmirch any legitimate enterprise that helps with translation or other ancillary services; only to expose those people and entities who practice law without a license and, in the process, defraud and harm the consuming public.   

The Coimbra Law Firm has a distinct combination of lengthy experience, knowledge, skill and legal writing ability that gives it a tremendous edge over other immigration lawyers or law firms.  Lorgio Coimbra was been involved in the immigration field for over a decade, first as a law clerk, then as an associate attorney, and now as the chairman of the Coimbra Law Firm. He is aggressive, efficient and meticulous in representing his clients.  As a fluent Spanish speaker whose parents were immigrants to this country, he is particularly empathetic and compassionate towards his clients and their plight.  The Coimbra Law Firm charges extremely reasonable rates.  And the first consultation with the attorney is free.  Please contact us today at Esquire@CoimbraLaw.com and/or 1-855-PA-GANAR (or 1-855-724-2627).

Is Your Boss Breaking The Law? Common California Labor Code Violations and Other Abuses

By Lorgio Coimbra, Esq. 

You may think you are being treated well or fairly-compensated by your boss. But, in many cases, your employer may be unlawfully exploiting you...and you may not even know it. 

American history is laden with friction between management and labor.  The American labor union movement was borne out of a collective labor frustration with exploitation by their corporate bosses. Fortunately for workers, there is legal recourse for any number of exploitative and abusive employer practices.  In California, employers can be made to pay stiff fines, penalties and damages for violating state and federal labor laws.  Here are some common labor law violations that employers commit for which they can be civilly liable.

Paying employees flat salary when they should be paying hourly wages

Employers cannot arbitrarily classify their workers as salaried workers so they can avoid paying overtime. Labor laws in California have stringent guidelines concerning who is considered “exempt” from overtime pay. Examples of exempt employees include “professional” workers and “administrative” workers. However, it is not enough for an employee to be called a “manager” or “administrator;” he or she must have “hiring and firing authority” and the other hallmarks of autonomy before they can be denied overtime (usually by paying them a flat annual salary as opposed to hourly wages).

At the end of the day, regardless of the job title or designation, the worker’s job duties are taken into account in determining whether the employee is an administrative worker or not. 

Misclassifying workers as independent contractors

Many times, employers will classify their employees as independent contractors.  Doing so can save the employer the headache of paying overtime, insurance and additional taxes.  However, your employer could be on the hook for breaking labor laws.  For you to qualify as an independent contractor, you must be able to make your own schedule, use yoor own tools, vehicle and equipment, not be required to wear a company uniform and not have a manager or supervisor regularly giving you direction or instruction.  If, on the other hand, you are being instructed what to do on a regular basis and/or use the company’s supplies to carry out your tasks, your employer could be liable for lost overtime pay. 

Not allowing you enough time to eat your lunch, or burdening you with work activities during your lunch hour

In California, employees working 5+ hours a day must receive a 30 minute meal break free of work duties.  Under California labor laws, breaks must be devoid of any work activity or your employer must compensate you.  

For example, if you have to answer a phone call, tend to the front desk, watch or hear a presentation, or otherwise engage in any job-related task while you are on your break, you have been denied your lunch break.  The law requires that your boss reimburse you for that lost time. 

A meal break after five (5) hours of work is required in most occupations.  If your boss makes you work over ten hours a day, you, as a California employee, are entitled to two (2) thirty-minute (30) minute meal periods.  And for such days where you work over ten (10) hours, your meal breaks cannot be more than five (5) hours apart. 

Firing a worker because she is pregnant

Under California law, all employers must provide “reasonable accommodations” for their pregnant employees. Employers are responsible for making sure that the pregnant worker is allowed more rest breaks during the work day, and that she is permitted to see her gynecologist during work hours if needed. Should the mother decide to go on maternity leave, the employer must have the same job available for her when she returns, or a position comparable to her old job.  In most cases, it is unlawful for an employer to eliminate the returning mother’s position or to give her a demotion. 

Discriminating against disabled workers

The Federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and California law make it unlawful for employers to discriminate their employees on the basis of a disability.  Many disabled workers in California are already experiencing the hardships, stresses and challenges of living with a disability.  Discrimination at their place of employment or loss of employment (on account of their disability) only compounds such difficulties. It is against federal and state law for your employer to refuse to accommodate you for your disability.  If you have sustained an injury or have been diagnosed with an illness, the law requires employers to provide appropriate modifications to your work environment and otherwise accommodate for your disability.  



Defaming employees

In California, you can sue your employer for defamation if they have been terminated because a supervisor, co-worker or manager made a false verbal or written statement about you. 

Defamation refers to disseminating or publicizing (a) falsehood(s) about an individual, group or organization. If your employer terminated you on the basis of false statements made about you by a supervisor, a manager or co-workers, or if you have been wrongfully accused of theft, harassment or dishonesty, you may be able to pursue legal action against your employer for defamation (slander or libel). 

If, as a consequence of your employer’s defamatory conduct, you have sustained professional harm, you may be entitled to a monetary award for the damages you suffered. Defamation may include propagating or spreading a “calumny” or malicious lie about you, uttering false statements that make you appear incompetent or inefficient or accusing you of stealing money.

If you have been the victim of workplace defamation, you may be entitled to be compensated for the punitive damages, compensatory damages for emotional pain and suffering, attorney’s fees and court costs.

Failing to reimburse you for labor-related expenses 

If you have had to use your own funds to make purchases that are necessary to carry out your job duties (i.e., "job-related expenses"), your boss must reimburse you for these expenses. It is not a matter of generosity: it is the law.

Disclaimer: Nothing in this blog constitutes legal advice or counsel and should never be construed to be legal advice or counsel.  Author is not responsible for how content is interpreted. 

The Coimbra Law Office fights for discriminated, wrongfully-terminated and underpaid workers. Lorgio Coimbra is an aggressive and no-holds-barred advocate of California workers.  Mr. Coimbra is licensed in the State of California and, as a result, only represents injured California workers.  If your employer has denied you wages, overtime, failed to accommodate your for pregnancy or disability, wrongfully terminated you, discriminated against you or defamed you, contact the Coimbra Law Office as soon as possible at our toll-free number: 1-855-I-H8-BOSS (1-855-448-2677) or e-mail us at CoimbraLaw@Yahoo.com. Se habla Español.