BLOG.TINVESTIGATIONS.COM

Hiding In Plain Site

2010-10-18T20:30:00Z

I wanted to post this very informative article written by my associate Pat Shaughnessy. She has worked as a private investigator and in the field of investigations for thirty-years. I have been fortunate to work with Pat and appreciate her specialized knowledge, high standard of professional ethics, expertise and qualifications.

Intellenet investigators, Sheila Klopper and Pat Shaughnessy, assist in locating Montana parole fugitive, Frank R. Dryman, DOB: 06-04-1931, who absconded from parole in 1972. It was our task to locate this long-missing fugitive who was believed to have possibly moved to Arizona. Sheila was hired by a local California attorney who represented our client, Clem Pellett an oral surgeon from Bellevue, Washington. Dr. Pellett's grandfather, Clarence C Pellett, was brutally murdered by Frank Dryman, a.k.a. Frank R. Valentine, and a.k.a. Victor Houston in April of 1951 near Shelby, Montana.

Sheila conducted database research with Merlin and develop two possible addresses in Arizona. One was in Glendale, a suburb of Phoenix, and a P.O. Box in Arizona city located near Casa Grande, Arizona approximately an hour from Phoenix. Sheila hired Pat to assist with the Arizona research.

Pat undertook the usual skip tracing for the fugitive researching public records in the state of Arizona and Maricopa County, specifically in Glendale, Arizona. After checking with the local directories for the last 10 years for each the Glendale address, as well as the assessor and recorder records, there was no indication Dryman or Valentine had, at least for any significant amount of time, resided at the Glendale address. This residence has been owned by the same individual for a good number of years and that individual was not familiar with the fugitive. No Arizona records were found under either name for the fugitive via litigation, judgments, liens, or any other records, including motor vehicle. Other online and database research was conducted to no avail.

A special postal forwarding request was sent to the Arizona City Postmistress. Originally research with Skip Smasher showed a business name associated with the provided P.O. Box. At the time we were not privy to the type of business, the fugitive ran if any, plus another name appeared to be linked to it. Pat received the results back from the postal forwarding search by mail, which luckily provided a physical address. This turned out to be the key piece of information needed to further locate Dryman, who was later found to live at this address, but under an assumed name.

Based on the new address, provided we ran new database research which revealed the documents name as Victor Houston. In order to ascertain if Victor Houston and Frank Dryman were the same individual, motor vehicle records were obtained, particularly a photo ID. Pat asked Sheila to provide a photograph that the client or Montana parole authorities might have of the fugitive as we were unable to find a photograph of him on the Montana Department of Corrections website. We learned from Sheila that the fugitive had identifiable tattoos, between his fingers he obtained in prison, which would aid in identifying him.

Further research learned Victor Houston was the proprietary of Pink Panthers Signs, was an official public notary, and licensed to marry as a deacon.

Utilizing the services of colleagues in Arizona license investigator Patrick Cote, who resided in nearby Casa Grande. It was agreed Patrick would visit the residence provided by the post office. Patrick approached the property owned by Dryman/Houston after Pat obtain a good photo ID of the subject. While meeting with the person at the Arizona city property, Patrick was able to clearly observe the prison tattoos, although somewhat altered, on its hands. Patrick telephone Pat once he was certain of the subject's identity. Pat in turn telephone Sheila, who was attending an Intellenet conference in New Orleans that very day! To state that our client was happy with the results would be an understatement.

The client had undertaken considerable background research of the fugitive in Montana, California, and to some extent Nevada, his Navy history, plus other criminal history including the robbery of a liquor store in Nevada prior to the murder. Dr. Pellett has since come to Arizona to meet with the investigators on the case and was part of a presentation given to the Arizona's Association of Licensed Investigators (an audio CD of that presentation is available). The trio of investigators and Dr. Pellett also gave a similar presentation to the national Association of Legal Investigators at their annual conference in Las Vegas in June of 2010. Additionally, the team participated in an Internet radio presentation on July 1, 2010, "Hiding in Plain Sight," a new show hosted by Francie Koehler, "PI's declassified." This radio show is available at www.voiceamerica.com or www. pisdeclassified.com/show.

Once the fugitive was arrested Pat and Sheila conducted an extensive background of Frank Dryman, primarily for the benefit of the Montana Parole Board, to establish his activities over the last 38 years. Public and other records were researched in states known to have been residences for the fugitive, including Arizona, New Mexico and Nevada. Sheila concentrated on California research but also assisted in developing a chronological portrait of Dryman's marriages, divorce, and places of residence along with known family members.

Besides obtaining Arizona motor vehicle records, number of real property related documents were located for Victor Houston pertaining to the Arizona city property, Arizona Secretary of State's notary commission records, and divorce records from the fugitive's fifth marriage to a Debbie K. Houston, whom he married in Las Vegas. Interviews were held with a couple of local Arizona City residents, one neighbor and good friend of the fugitive provided a local perspective and a vast amount of information, leads to other marriages, information on Dryman's children, some New Mexico history involving a son-in-law with a questionable death, and other character-related data.

Pat and Patrick interviewed others to further embellish on Dryman's past history including with local authorities, and with the father of Dryman's son-in-law who died in a somewhat suspicious manner. Research has been undertaken to ferret out rumors that Dryman may have been involved in the disappearance of one of his five wives. Marriage records there obtained between California and Las Vegas, Nevada. The plot has thickened indicating this case may not be over as research is ongoing to determine the identity of the possible missing wife and the circumstances surrounding Dryman's son-in-law's death!

Armed with the assembled records between the client and the investigators, Dr.Pellett and other members of the Pellett family testified at the fugitive's parole hearing in Montana on June 4, 2010. The parole board revoked Dryman's parole and returned him to prison; his parole eligibility will be reevaluated in five years. Of note at this hearing, Dryman's daughter emotionally stated that her daughter would have to grow up without her grandfather. The Pellett grandchildren had also grown up without their grandfather thanks to Dryman.

Note from T & T Investigations: We often work closely with other investigators using whatever resources and expertise needed and available to find a solution and solve a case. If you have a question or need assistance please call us for a free consultation.

Criminal Charges for Sexting?

2010-06-03T19:23:00Z

“Sexting” is the sending of nude or sexually suggestive pictures by electronic means (i.e. cell phone or other electronic devices) to another person.

Sexcasting is the sending of live nude video via a webcam.

The intent of the Sexual Exploitation of a Child law was written to charge adult offenders with exploiting a child victim. The law as written did not anticipate young people engaging in what we now refer to as "sexting". Ask a young person today if they have ever heard of sexting and you will get various responses. Most teens know about the possible negative consequences; however few know that they could be charged with a criminal offense. Sending sexual images of minors or of yourself is a potential criminal offense. The laws have not been able to change as quickly as the technology of camera cell phones and other technology. Teens who exchange sexually explicit photos of themselves through cell phones or other electronic devices can be and have been charged with Sexual Exploitation of a Child. The practice has raised concerns for parents, educators, and law enforcement officials alike all over the nation.

Do you think this sounds crazy? It is more widespread than you might think. It’s been around since about 2005 with the explosion of camera and internet phones, and data suggests that at least 20% of teens have engaged in sexting at some point- that’s one out of every five teenagers that you know. Sexting is the “in” thing to do these days, but most kids are not aware of the legal trouble that such practices can cause.

Is it really child pornography? Teens across the country have been criminally charged for sending and posting nude or semi-nude pictures of themselves to another young person. Here are some real stories of states that believe it is a crime:

February 2010 - Colorado- several middle school students in Colorado Springs were suspended after distributing a text message photo of a nude 12-year-old girl. Charges could be filed, leading to students being adjudicated as juveniles who have committed sexual offenses.

January 2010-Indiana-A pair of Indiana middle school students are the latest minors to face felony charges for allegedly "sexting" naked photos to each other. The students--a 13-year-old girl and a 12-year-old boy--were charged in connection with an incident last week at Ben Franklin Middle School in Valparaiso. The students are each facing felony child exploitation and possession of child pornography charges, according to the police report.

September 2009 – Florida –a 13-year old girl hanged herself after pictures she sent to her boyfriend were sent out to other peers, the second such reported case (an 18-year old girl from Ohio killed herself in July 2009 based on a similar incident.

March 2009 - Florida- an 18-year-old boy was charged and convicted of sending child pornography after sending a naked photo of his 16-year-old girlfriend to friends and family members after an argument. He was sentenced to five years probation and was required to register as a sex offender.

January 2009 – Pennsylvania – Fox news reported 3 teenage girls were charged with creation of child pornography for “sexting” and 3 teenage boys were charged with possession of child pornography for receiving the images.

October 2008 – Texas – CBS reported an 8th grade student spent a night in jail after a coach found a nude picture on his cell phone that was sent by another student.

Research indicates sexting is already a full-blown epidemic in the U.S and other countries. It is probably here to stay. What we can do for our communities is push for educational legislation not criminal arrests. Charging children with a sexual crime and requiring them to register as a sexual offender is not the answer to this ever growing problem. Law enforcement, prosecutors, judges, schools and parents need to work together and require that schools provide information to children on the dangers involved in sexting. Educate and talk with your children today. In my years of service I have seen the enormous impact a sex crime can have on families. In the seconds it takes to snap a nude digital photo and send it in a cell phone text, "sexting" can ruin a reputation, result in criminal charges and literally destroy lives. Parents get informed, talk about it with your teens, teach them about modesty, set rules about texting, check up on them, establish consequences, ban camera phones if necessary and teach your kids the importance of interpersonal not virtual communication.

PRECHARGE DUI MISDEMEANOR AND DUI FELONY CASES

2010-02-23T02:35:00Z

Whether in the Phoenix area, or anywhere in Arizona, if you are arrested, questioned and released without a citation (or if the police are attempting to contact you regarding criminal allegations from another person) then you are currently in the “Precharge/ Investigation Stage” of a criminal case. This is the most important time to contact a private investigator. We will provide the resources you need and recommend the best possible solution. Once you have been charged, this information will always be logged inside of a computer, and you will always have to consider this every time you apply for employment. If you are applying for certain jobs you will also have to wait in wonder if this will show up on a background check. The social stigma and effect on your career may have lifelong negative consequences.
In certain DUI cases the police officer will get a blood or breath test, and then you will be released without any type of citation or paperwork. The reason that the Police do this is that they are waiting to get a blood result, or they wish to do a “Long Form Complaint” and route your police report to the Prosecutor's Office. The prosecutor's office then makes a charging decision. If it is a misdemeanor, according to Arizona law (Statute of Limitations) they have one (1) year in which to file charges. In the case of a felony they have seven (7) years to file charges before the Statute of Limitations runs out. There is no Statute of Limitations for Vehicular First Degree Murder.
If you were served with an “Administrative Per Se, Implied Consent” DMV (Department of Motor Vehicle) affidavit on the date of your arrest (i.e., a pink and yellow piece of paper), we can help you file a Request for Hearing with the DMV. If your case involves the taking of blood during your DUI arrest, you will need to wait and see whether your results come back above or below a .08. If they are above a .08, the Officer will forward a request for suspension to the DMV office. The DMV office will then notify you with a Notice of Suspension.
It usually takes the DMV approximately two months to send out a hearing date notice after a Request for Hearing is completed. The hearing is then usually held one month after the notice is received. During this two to three month time span, your license is valid and you are allowed to drive. You will either have the yellow copy in your possession (if your case was a “breath” case), or it will be entered in the computer that you are okay to drive if you are a “blood” case. If you are stopped by an Officer during that period of time and he informs you that your license is suspended, simply tell him that you have submitted the paperwork and requested a hearing. The Officer may still cite you for driving on a suspended license. If you have retained representation contact your attorney immediately and they will inform you of how to proceed. In regards to additional criminal charges beyond the potential DUI, if you have hired an attorney the following is a list of other things that may happen during your investigation.
• Contact the Officers or Detectives involved in your case.
• The charging prosecutors' will be contacted. Attempts will be made at this time for the case not to be charged or for them to charge it to the lowest possible offense.
• The police report will be reviewed with you present. Normally the report is not available while the investigation is still pending. Additionally the officers or detectives will not grant an interview while the investigation is pending.
• An attempt will be made to interview any known civilian witnesses.
• If your case involves specific false allegations of conduct you may benefit from having a poligapher conduct a polygraph examination (lie detector test).
• Hire a private investigator to investigate and research your case.

This article is to be suggestive and informative only, we are not attorneys. Each private investigation company operates in a different manner. Additionally, if you have hired an attorney they may or may not believe that these suggestions are helpful. In closing, beware the prosecutor does not have to inform you that charges have been filed. In the best case scenario you receive a notice by mail of a summons issued to the address listed on the date of the alleged violation, or they could issue a direct “Bench Warrant” for your arrest. If you have hired our agency to assist you we will check periodically with the Court to see if the Prosecutor filed charges. If a Bench Warrant is discovered, we will call you immediately and walk you through the process of resolving the warrant.

Call Us For a Free Consultation!

2010-01-14T02:32:00Z

Sexual Predator vs. Sex Offender

2010-01-14T02:09:00Z

There is a difference between a sexual predator and a sexual offender. The general public however, mistakenly confuses the terms “predator” and “sex offender” as interchangeable or one in the same. Due to recent questions and concerns we will display some of the known facts in Arizona.

In Arizona, all sex offenders classified as "predator" are housed at the State Hospital. Once an offender completes his sentence (Arizona Department of Corrections) and is scheduled for release, the offender may be reviewed for violent sexual predator criteria. This process can also be enforced if an offender is placed on probation and has been found in violation of those conditions of probations. If is it determined that the offender is a violent sexual predator, Arizona law provides for a civil commitment to the Arizona State Hospital. The sex offender may request an annual review to determine is he is eligible for release into society, at which time the label of "predator" is removed.

Being required to register as a “sex offender” in Arizona is currently a lifetime duty, regardless of the severity of the crime. Juvenile sex offenders prosecuted as adults are required to register. This requirement may be terminated upon successful completion of probation. Registration and public notification are the single greatest obstacle former offenders face in their attempts to successfully reintegrate back into society. The California case referenced in an earlier blog regarding the discovery of a young girl who was kidnapped and held captive for 18 years by convicted sex offender Phillip Garrido, serves as a chilling example of just how, ineffective registration laws have become. The “system” is so overburdened by the numerous crimes that were not predatory in nature that dangerous and predatory offenders often slip through the cracks. The burden placed on law enforcement to manage offenders whose crimes were neither predatory and/or were completely devoid of criminal intent leave them minimal time to focus and make the necessary distinctions. Most law enforcement officials charged with verifying addresses and updating the whereabouts of former sex offenders make distinctions between “predators” like Phillip Garrido and those convicted of “consensual” crimes that have been registering and living offense free for decades. They work as closely as possible with probation and other state agencies to make that distinction. However, those same law enforcement agencies and officials also report that the current system is overloaded and understaffed. The result is both obvious and disturbing. Law enforcement and other state officials are doing the ever changing job they were hired to do. What will it take for someone to begin to notice that there is not enough time in a day to complete the task at hand without missing some important aspect of the case? Will it be at the expense of the very children these laws are designed to protect?

In Arizona, sexting can result in possible charges of sexual exploitation of a minor. Each image carries a presumption prison term of 17 years. Child pornography laws were never designed for these types of technology. Please continue to follow T & T Investigations as we research this issue, offer suggestions and warnings to parents and identify how this will continue to burden the sex offender registration system that is already on the verge of break down.

Identity Theft

2009-12-04T18:21:00Z

Identity theft and identity fraud are crimes. In short the terms are used to refer to all types of crime in which someone wrongfully obtains and uses another person's personal data in some way that involves fraud or deception, typically for economic gain. I interviewed numerous defendant's who reported they committed these types of crimes specifically for economic gain. During these tough economic times identity theft and fraud crimes are on the rise. The Federal Bureau of Investigation reports that it is one of the fastest growing crimes in the United States.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) cites the following examples:

Credit Card Fraud: The thief opens a new credit account under your name or changes the billing address on your credit card statement and then incurs the charges on you existing account without your knowledge.

Bank and Finance Fraud: The thief gets a loan in your name, or creates fake checks using your existing account information, or writes bad checks after opening up a new bank account under your name, or drains your exiting bank account by cloning your debit or ATM card.

Utilities Fraud: The thief employs your personal data to open a new phone or utility account in your name.

Government Documents Fraud: The thief exploits your information to get a phony driver's license or ID card, or uses your name and Social Security number to file bogus tax returns or receive government benefits.

Additional Types of Fraud: The thief uses your data to apply for a job, get medical services or identify himself after committing a crime.

Did you know that a large percentage of victims believe their information was compromised by someone they know. Another sizeable portion of victims never figure out how their personal data was stolen.

There is no way to stop all forms of identity theft, however there are many techniques you can use to reduce your risk and take control of your PRIVATE information.

P-Protect your personal information. Protect your purse and wallet. Shred items with any personal information including financial statements, credit card offers and any other mail that may help a thief identify you.

R-Remind yourself to check your financial records frequently. Look for charges you did not incur. Know your mail and be suspicious if you do not receive a credit card bill or bank statement it could have been stolen or redirected by the thieves.

I-Investigate forms and policies. They can be misleading. Much of the information requested on applications and forms by financial institutions, medical offices and government is not legally mandatory. Many people accept that the requestor has a lawful right for the information because the question appears on the form. Read the law and understand exactly what is required. Ask the person requesting the form to show you the law.

V-Don't be a victim. If you suspect you are the victim of identity theft file a report with the Federal Trade Commission, contact the fraud units of the three major credit reporting agencies, TransUnion, Experian and Equifax. Ask the reporting agencies to place a fraud alert on your reports. Communicate with your creditors and financial institutions. File a report with local law enforcement. Keep detailed notes of you conversations with authorities and institutions. Keep notes of the people you spoke with including full names, badge numbers, dates and times.

A-Annual credit reports are free. Check these reports for any suspicious activity.

T-Take the time to act now. By acting now in a few simple ways you may avoid being the victim of identity theft. It is a known fact that thieves look for easy targets.

E-End terminate or stop identity theft. Anytime you don't initiate a transaction whether it be a phone call or email, be suspicious. If you receive an email don't respond. If it is a genuine request there should be a note on your account when you securely check in. If there is no alert contact the financial intuition and request further information. You can no longer trust caller ID. Attackers are reprogramming the number and disguising it as your bank. I actually tested this out with a fellow investigator from New York. He called me and asked me "what number comes up on your caller id? Interesting enough the call was coming from T & T Investigations in Phoenix, AZ ,our investigative firm.

If you are interested in further information on identity theft please contact T & T Investigations. If you suspect someone has used your identity and reside in the state of Arizona we can investigate the use of your social security number for a minimal fee . If you do not reside in Arizona we can offer other resources and referrals.

M ore Resources on Identity Theft:

Federal Trade Commission: www.ftc.gov/idtheft
U.S. Department of Justice: www.usdoj.gov/criminal/fraud
Free Annual Credit Report: www.annualcreditreport.com
http://media.csosa.gov/podcast/audio/category/idendity-theft/

Search and Seizure

2009-11-06T20:33:00Z

Weigh in on the Fourth Amendment

SEARCH AND SEIZURE

As defined by the U.S. Constitution: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated; and no Warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported

by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Any law enforcement officer in Arizona will be the first to tell you that during an arrest they have been permitted to search the passenger compartment of vehicles and the Supreme Court has allowed it. The Supreme Court ruling was based on the 1981 case New York v. Belton. Police began the searches that were termed “incident to arrest.” This decision was based and started as a protective method in case there was a hidden weapon in the vehicle. Law enforcement officers would tell you they felt safer and believed the community was safer as well.

What precipitated this change? On August 25, 1999, Tucson, Arizona police officers returned to a house they had visited earlier in the day where they suspected drugs were being sold. After contacting a man and woman near the house and placing them under arrest, they observed a vehicle pull into the driveway at the house. Officers recognized the driver as Rodney Gant a subject they had contacted earlier in the day. The subject Gant had a warrant for his arrest for driving on a suspended license and was again observed driving on a suspended license. The officers immediately arrested Gant and

handcuffed him. He was subsequently locked in the backseat of a police vehicle. Officers searched Gant’s car, found a gun, and discovered a bag of cocaine in the pocket of a jacket on the backseat. Gant was charged with possession of a narcotic drug for sale and possession of drug paraphernalia.

In Court Gant moved to suppress the evidence seized from his car on the ground that the warrantless search violated the Fourth Amendment. The trial court denied the Motion to Suppress and Gant appealed. Eventually, the Arizona Supreme Court concluded that the search of Gant’s car was unreasonable within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. The State of Arizona appealed that decision to the United States Supreme Court.

In the years since the Belton case, many courts, had interpreted Belton to create a rule that searches of an automobile’s passenger compartment incident to arrest were reasonable regardless of whether there is a possibility of an arrest getting access to a weapon or evidence in the car. Thus, the rule widely taught was that even if an officer removes an arrest from a vehicle, places them in handcuffs and moves them back away from the car, the vehicle could still be searched incident to arrest because of the chance that the arrest would break free from the officers and get back inside the vehicle to obtain a weapon.

In Gant, the Supreme Court makes it clear that this is no longer the law. The Supreme Court has now clarified that a search incident to arrest of an automobile is authorized only when “the arrestee is unsecured and within reaching distance of the passenger compartment at the time of the search” or when it is “reasonable to believe evidence relevant to the crime of arrest might be found in the vehicle.” The Supreme Court notes that when the crime committed is only a traffic violation, there will be no evidence relevant to the crime of arrest and no search can be conducted.

Do you think this is a positive decision for individual rights? Do law enforcement officers need searches “incident to arrest” for their protection? This is a very controversial issue that has been in and out of the Court system for years. Please feel free to add your comments to this discussion.

ARE YOU IN THE CYCLE OF VIOLENCE?

2009-08-30T23:16:00Z

Threats to the safety of our children are a growing problem in Arizona, and around the world. After the recent arrest of a dangerous sex offender I felt the desire to offer some additional information about our sex offender laws in Arizona, and to pose some questions for us to consider. There are ways for each one of us to help protect the community, and keep our neighborhoods safer. Do you talk with your children? Do you use the available resources to see if you have sex offenders in your area? Are you vigilant about your surroundings? Are you involved in your neighborhood block watch? Do you call crime stop if you observe something unusual happening in your community?

The above circle shows the impact an offender has on victims, family’s, the community and society as a whole. During one of my trainings we were required to make a list of everyone who is affected in the circle of violence. It was astonishing how many people are affected by one act of violence. The list goes on and on….So when does the cycle stop? The case of Phillip Gallido inspired me to write this article so let’s imagine where the cycle of violence began. We can’t make this determination because we know little of about where he came from. We do know he had prior victims. He was convicted of kidnapping and rape and sentenced to fifty-years in prison, but was released after ten years. Think about the circle he had prior to kidnapping Jacyee Lee Dugad. Who would you put in the circle? Jacyee herself, her children, her family biological and the one she spent a good part of her life with, neighbors, law-enforcement, law-enforcements family, those responsible for releasing him, correctional treatment programs, and the list is never ending. We must work together on this issue. If you have questions or want to report a crime and are afraid or not willing to discuss it with the police, call our company and we will assist you in any way we can. If you are a victim of a sexual offense or other dangerous crime please call immediately to discuss your case in full privacy. For more information contact www.tinvestigations.com

For anyone else who is reviewing this information, please refer to your state statutes for sex offender laws in your area. The information provided is not new and is taken from Arizona revised statute 13-3821 through 13-3827.

Sex offender notification for neighborhoods and communities:

The following is a brief summary of Arizona Revised Statutes 13-3821 through 13-3827:

A sex offender is a person who has been convicted of a violation or attempted violation of any of the following offenses, including but not limited to:

• Sexual Abuse if the victim is under the age of 18

• Sexual Conduct with a Minor

• Sexual Assault

• Molestation of a Child

• Child Prostitution

• Sexual Exploitation of a Minor

Before releasing the offender from incarceration, the Arizona Department of Corrections in conjunction with the Arizona Department of Public Safety and each county sheriff may complete the registration of any convicted sex offender. After releasing a sex offender from incarceration, the Department of Corrections has three days to forward the convicted sex offender’s records to the county sheriff’s office and the state department of public safety. Upon conviction, sex offenders have 10 days to register with the county sheriff’s office. The sheriff’s office will then notify the local police department in the area where the sex offender intends to reside.

Guidelines:

A committee comprised of adult probation officers, county attorneys, sheriffs, chiefs of police and legislators has implemented specific community notification guidelines. The guidelines provide for levels of notification based on the risk that a particular sex offender poses to the community.

Level III: poses a high risk to re-offend

Level II: an intermediate

Level I: a low risk.

The notification requirements are as follows:

For Level III offenders, the notification shall be made to the surrounding neighborhood, area schools, appropriate community groups, and an offender’s prospective employer. A flyer will include a photo of the offender, an exact address, as well as a summary of the offender’s status and criminal background. A press release will be given to television and newspaper media. If a level three offender fails to register, a warrant is issued and the community is notified.

For Level II offenders, the notification may be made to the immediate neighbors, schools, appropriate community groups and prospective employers. The notification may include a flyer with a photo, and address of the general area where the offender will be residing as well as a brief summary of the offender’s status and criminal background. Notification may be made if the offender fails to register and a warrant is issued.

For Level I offenders, the local law enforcement agency that is responsible for the notification shall maintain information about the offender. The local law enforcement agency may distribute this information to other law enforcement agencies and may give notification to the people with whom the offender resides. Notification may be made if the offender fails to register and a warrant is issued.

What you should know...

Sex Offenders are required to register if they were convicted of the following:

• Any offense or attempted offense outlined on the previous page.

• Any other offense where the Court specifically orders registration.

Juvenile sex offenders prosecuted as adults are required to register. This requirement may be terminated upon successful completion of probation. The Arizona Department of Public Safety has established and maintains an Internet sex offender web site for offenders whose risk assessments have been determined to be Level II or Level III. The purpose of the web site is to provide sex offender information to the public and includes the offender’s current photo, name, date of birth, notification level, exact address, and offense committed.

www.azsexoffender.com

After an offender has registered, the driver’s license or identification card the offender carries is only valid for one year from the date of issuance. Every year, the offender must show proof of a current address and have a current photo taken. The motor vehicle department makes a copy of the photograph available to the criminal identification section at the Department of Public Safety or to any law enforcement agency. If you need to know additional information, details about the offender can be found in court documents at the Clerk of the Superior Court, Court Record Information section in the Central Court Building basement, located at 201 W. Jefferson in Phoenix, Arizona.

Failing to register and sentencing:

Failure to Register is a class four felony offense. A convicted sex offender, who fails to register, faces a maximum of lifetime probation or serves a term in the Department of Corrections of 1 to 3.75 years, or longer with prior convictions. If an offender has one prior felony conviction, he/she can face 2.25 to 7.5 years in the Department of Corrections. Probation is not available. If an offender has two or more prior felony convictions, he/she can face 6 to 15 years in the Department of Corrections. Probation is not available. The requirement to register is a lifetime requirement regardless of the sentence received. Homeless and transient offenders must still register.

Criminal Process

2009-08-24T18:21:00Z

So for those of you, who think the criminal process is boring, please bear with me because I get numerous questions about the process and so here it is. Please remember I am not an attorney and am recalling this process as a prior probation officer, so it may have errors. I am including some things from statute as it pertains to Arizona law as well as resources used as a prior probation officer. Each state is different, so check your states statute for items that may differ. When a person is arrested he/she will go through the following process:

v Initial Appearance: Four important events take place. This is the first time a suspect appears in court. An initial appearance for a person in custody must be held within 24 hours of arrest. Prior to this proceeding they will be interviewed by the Probation Departments Pretrial Services Unit. They will assist the Court in determining release status. They often verify the subjects address and employment when possible and call relatives when available. They check for any prior criminal history including current or prior (probation or parole, please note below the difference between probation and parole) and most important any history of violence. The Court will (1) inform the subject of the felony allegations. Decide, after reviewing the report how a person should be released and (2) appoint an attorney for those who are indigent (cannot afford an attorney). (3) The Court sets conditions of release. A person could be released on their own recognizance. This means the Court believes they are not a flight risk and all factors determine they will report to all future Court proceedings and they are a low risk to reoffend. As you all know there is no real way of knowing and some subjects have been released and gone back out and committed another crime. The Court does what they can to verify the information and makes the best possible decision regarding release. It has been my experience the court views the safety of the community as number one priority. The Court could place a person on supervised release. The subject would be required as directed to contact the Pre-trial service division sometimes on a daily basis. They also have officers who visit them in their homes and supervise their release while reporting back to the Court any problems. The judge could place a bond or hold a person without bond. I will list below the Arizona statute regarding these offenses as well as the ones that often go without bond. A summons with the date and time of the initial appearance is sent to individuals not in custody. (4) At the conclusion of the initial appearance hearing another court date is set for the next proceeding, usually in Justice Court or Superior Court.

This information is taken directly from the Arizona Revised Statute, Title 13.

13-601. Classification of offenses

A. Felonies are classified, for the purpose of sentence, into the following six categories:

1. Class 1 felonies.

2. Class 2 felonies.

3. Class 3 felonies.

4. Class 4 felonies.

5. Class 5 felonies.

6. Class 6 felonies.

B. Misdemeanors are classified, for the purpose of sentence, into the following three categories:

1. Class 1 misdemeanors.

2. Class 2 misdemeanors.

3. Class 3 misdemeanors.

C. Petty offenses are not classified.

Filing Charges

A felony charge is initiated by a complaint or an indictment. A prosecutor files a direct complaint in court, citing which crimes were allegedly committed. An indictment is issued by a grand jury, which determines from evidence presented by a prosecutor that a crime was committed and the suspect should stand trial on the allegations. Both a direct complaint and indictment define the alleged crimes and cite the date of offense and which laws were violated.

The defendant is notified when criminally charged and informed when to appear for the next court date. A judge can issue an arrest warrant if information is presented to indicate the person will not voluntarily appear in court at the scheduled time.

v Preliminary Hearing: A preliminary hearing is required when a felony case is initiated by a direct complaint. The prosecutor presents evidence and witnesses to try to establish probable cause that the crime was committed and the defendant should stand trial. Generally, a preliminary hearing is held in Justice Court, but it may be held in Superior Court. The judge can dismiss the case for insufficient evidence or order a trial.

v Grand Jury: Another method for initiating charges against a defendant is a grand jury indictment. The grand jury, comprising 16 jurors, determines whether probable cause exists based on evidence presented by the prosecutor. Grand juror proceedings are secret and their actions become public only through the indictment, if one is handed up.

v Arraignment: This brief Superior Court hearing is the defendant's opportunity to enter a plea to the charges. If the defendant enters a "not guilty" plea, a court date will be set. If the defendant enters a "guilty" plea, a sentencing hearing will be scheduled.

v Trial: In a criminal trial, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the crime. Superior Court juries have either eight or twelve jurors depending on the nature of the charges. A verdict must be unanimous or a mistrial can be declared and the case could be retried. On rare occasions, instead of having a jury trial, the defendant and prosecutor agree to a bench trial and ask a judge to determine the verdict. In a case where a not guilty verdict is reached, the charges are dismissed and the defendant cannot be retried on the same charge. This is called "double jeopardy."

v Sentencing: A defendant who is found guilty faces a range of possible sentences for the crime. When a verdict is returned, the judge sets a sentencing date within about 30 days. At this time in most cases unless the Court waives the order, a presentence investigation is conducted through the Probation Department. In an investigation for a presentence report, the adult probation officer shall inquire into the circumstances of the offense, the convicted person's history of delinquency or criminality, social history, employment history, family situation, and economic status. They also investigate the defendant’s ability to contribute to reimbursement for the costs of the person's legal defense, education and personal habits. The presentence report shall contain a recommendation by the officer regarding contribution by the convicted person toward the costs of legal defense. The officer will inquire into the physical, emotional and financial impact of the offense has had on the victim and the emotional and financial impact of the offense on the immediate family of the victim. The officer notifies the victim or the immediate family of the victim of the right to appear personally or by counsel at any aggravation or mitigation proceeding (this writer will address aggravating and mitigating circumstances at this articles conclusion). At a sentencing hearing, both the defense and the prosecution can present evidence to help the judge determine an appropriate sentence. Victims have the right to address the court on what they believe would be a proper sentence.

Ø Arizona law provides for the death penalty in first-degree murder cases that are especially cruel, heinous or depraved.

Ø Life imprisonment is also an option for murder convictions. The severity of crimes determines the length of sentences.

Ø Sentences of one year or less are served in the county jail.

Ø Sentences of more than one year are served in a state Department of Corrections facility.

Ø For less severe cases, a defendant may be sentenced to a term of probation. The court may impose conditions of probation that could include jail time, community service and counseling. Defendants may also be ordered to pay restitution to their victims.

Ø The options available to trial Court include imprisonment, or various types of probation.

13-901 probation

PROBATION - The release into the community of a defendant who has been found guilty of a crime, typically under certain conditions, such as paying a fine, doing community service or attending a drug treatment program. Violation of the conditions can result in incarceration. In the employment context, probation refers to the trial period some new employees go through.

Arizona parole Article 2 section 31-411

PAROLE - Any form of release of an offender from imprisonment to the community by a releasing authority prior to the expiration of his sentence, subject to conditions imposed by the releasing authority and to its supervision, including a term of supervised release. 18 USC Congress has abolished parole for people convicted of federal crimes, but most states still offer parole. GRAY C FLOOR AMENDMENT SENATE AMENDMENTS TO S.B. 128.