Tag: criminal defense lawyer

  • Trump & Section 3 of Fourteenth Amendment

    The following are notes and comments about Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment which is the authority on which the Colorado courts focused when deciding former President Trump’s name should be removed from the ballots in Colorado. The allegation is that Trump is not eligible to hold office because he allegedly engaged in an insurrection against the United State Government on Jan. 6, 2021. The fact that Trump was President of the United States at that time raises the issue of how he could be engaged in Insurrection. when he was the Chief Executive Officer of the military and in charge of the Executive Department’s law enforcement agencies. Nevertheless, the Colorado courts held a five-day trial and argued that Trump received more due process than he used, needed or requested.

    Due Process in the Colorado Courts. Nobody apparently argued that Trump was not allowed to present evidence or was denied opportunity to defend his case in the Colorado courts. The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments from Trump’s lawyers and the State of Colorado last week and could announce its ruling at any time. Much of what follows is based on the writings of Law Professor Josh Blackman published at a link provided below.

    Is Section 3 Self-Executing? One huge question before SCOTUS is whether Section 3 is self-executing. For a defendant or other litigant to seek affirmative relief in a Collateral Proceeding (the Griffin case discussed below), Congress must provide a cause of action. But Section 3 can  be used as a shield in a trial court, or on direct appeal. For various reasons, Trump’s attorney was very tentative in answering questions that various Justices asked him regarding this issue. The issues herein seemed to serve Trump very well at the trial level of the Colorado courts and several Justices seemed to be open to ruling that Section 3 is NOT self-executing.


    See Josh Blackman at Volokh Conspiracy.

    (more…)
  • Open-Carry of a Shotgun: A Good Idea in an Apartment Complex?

    Open-Carry of a Shotgun: A Good Idea in an Apartment Complex?

    The day before Thanksgiving (2023), the Law Office of Mark Knapp PLLC obtained an acquittal in a case alleging Second Degree Assault (with a firearm enhancement) in Snohomish County today. The three-day jury trial focused on open-carry issues and whether the complaining witness (the alleged victim) was justified in grabbing a loaded shotgun from our client. Grabbing a weapon is only justified where a threat of imminent deadly force exists.

    Subscribe

    Click on the link above to receive a free newsletter. We won’t spam you and look forward to discussing current legislative issues being decided in the courts. And especially Second Amendment litigation.

    We are planning an email newsletter and will be inviting viewers to subscribe. The initial messages are anticipated to be short and focused on the current legal landscape in Washington State and federal litigation, especially related to Second Amendment issues.

    Please consider subscribing. You can unsubscribe at any time.

    Self-Defense or Criminal Assault? Grabbing a shotgun—other than in self-defense—constitutes Assault in the Second Degree and could include Robbery charges, and a Firearms Enhancement. Our client told the police and the jury that he just went to the parking lot to check on his motorcycle when his neighbor approached him aggressively, demanding to know why he was carrying a shotgun in a common area.

    (more…)
  • Firearms Freedom Could Have Stopped Hamas

    Firearms Freedom Could Have Stopped Hamas

    A recent NY Times story tells a lot about Israel and the restrictions Israeli government imposes on its citizens:

    They were rounded up and shot like animals within hours of losing themselves, and the pressures of Israeli life, in thumping soundtracks of mystical peace and love. “There were these crazy maniacs with guns and people falling one by one,” Ms. Fakliro said. “It was like a shooting range.”

    Authorities Lulled Into a False Sense of Security. The gruesome reports of how Hamas and Islamic Jihad infiltrated Israel’s well regarded security perimeter are shocking to the world. Despite the extreme risk of terror attacks from Gaza, Israel’s government apparently believed that Hamas was focusing on social programs to help the Palestinians living within Gaza’s borders.

    Disarmed Israeli Civilians. Israel’s government had been taking steps to disarm civilians who possessed rifles and still requires the few rifles permitted in a Kibbutz or other danger zone to be stored in a way that denies hinders access to the weapons in an emergency.

    (more…)
  • The Road to Perpetual Warfare

    The United States seems to have embarked on a dangerous road toward perpetual warfare. Many people have recognized that the Iraq War and the promises of opening the Middle East to Democracy were more about opening we the People of the United States to manipulation.  

    In a sense it was about oil. But the overarching objective for global corporatists has been to maintain the dollar as the currency in which the IMF requires international banking reserves to be held. International bankers, like the Rockefellers and other family dynasties, have quietly stayed behind the scenes by working through groups like the Council on Foreign Relations and tax, exempt foundations that fund university studies. For example, the Ford Foundation is allegedly the biggest contributor to Black Lives Matter.

    (more…)
  • Purim: Self-Defense in Jewish History

    Today, March 6th, begins Purim 2023. This Jewish holiday is often treated like a blending of Christmas, Halloween and Easter with candy, gifts and costumes for kids. Most Christians ignore it. But there is a deep significance that goes beyond the over-romanticized marriage of newly crowned queen, Esther — who replaced Vashti when she was thrown out of the kingdom —  and King Ahasuerus, ruler of the Persia-Median Empire.

    The story is in the Book of Esther where Haman (the King’s adviser probably a descendant of Amalekites, ancient enemies of Israel) prevails on the King to decree a genocide against the captive Jewish population. The date was set by purim; i.e., the drawing of lots. The fact that Esther was secretly Jewish led to her appealing to the King not to allow the destruction of her people. According to the Hebrew calendar, Purim lands on the 14th day of the month Adar, which is the sixth month of the (Jewish) year. Adar roughly corresponds to March in the Gregorian calendar, give or take a few days.

    The photo below depicts Jan Žižka, a  contemporary and follower of Jan Hus and who led the resistance against overwhelming professional troops by raising a volunteer army of untrained farmers armed with pikes and a few muskets and pistols.   Žižka was a successful military leader and is now a national hero in the Czech Republic. He was nicknamed "One-eyed Žižka", having lost one and then both eyes. Jan Žižka led Hussite forces against three crusades and never lost a single battle despite being completely blind in his last stages of life. Like Esther, he stood for his people and stopped a genocide. The Moravian War helped launch the Reformation years before the time of Martin Luther.

    Queen Esther stood for her people while facing possible death for daring to approach the king without being summoned. King Ahasuerus issued a new decree because, under the ancient laws of the Medes, the King cannot revoke a decree that he has previously entered and proclaimed.

    (more…)
  • Julian Huxley, Second Amendment & UN Suzerainty

    Suzerain- Main Entry: su·zer·ain
    Pronunciation: ˈsü-zə-rən, -ˌrân; ˈsüz-rən

    Function: noun

    1 : a superior feudal lord to whom fealty is due: overlord;

    2 : a dominant state controlling the foreign relations of a vassal state but allowing it sovereign authority in its internal affairs.

    Jeremy Rabkin, a professor of law at George Mason University School of Law, recently authored an article published in Imprimis called “The Constitution and American Sovereignty”. In the article, Rabkin explains how the concept of national sovereignty, as we understand it today, developed during the Seventeenth century along with nationalism. (more…)

  • Bellingham Herald Reports Nothing About Whatcom County Acquittal?

    Kamuran Chabuk never set out to create a case history for legal advocates in the self-defense arena when he and his girlfriend went to check on a noise in their neighborhood. It sounded like someone near where they lived might have needed help. The neighbor making the noise was very drunk and he and another potential assailant followed the young couple to their home, continually harassing Chabuk and his girlfriend right up to their front door. Mr. Chabuk took out his gun and told the two men to leave the private area outside his residence. The two men, continued to advance towards Chabuk- even after one of them had been shot. Kamuran shot the most aggressive of the two; the aggressor did not realize he had been shot. The aggressor continued to advance even after Kamuran shot him a second and third time

    (more…)
  • Use of Force Policies & Law Enforcement

    Use of Force Policies & Law Enforcement

    In 2017, Chuck Delgado spoke to our Action Training Group regarding the circumstances when he shot and killed an unarmed attacker when he was a Spokane County Sheriff’s Deputy in 1971.  Chuck was neither charged nor disciplined because the use of force was justified.  Nevertheless, the shooting was contrary to use of force procedures in place in the Spokane County Sheriff’s Office in 1971. 

    The following is an After Action Report provided by Mr. Delgado.

    “If you wait until you see the muzzle flash of the adversary’s weapon, you waited too long.”

    -Bob Smith, Use of Force Expert


    Policies Are Great If They Don’t Get You Killed.  At the time of the 1971 shooting, the policy of the Spokane Police Department was to the effect of, “You only shoot after being fired upon.”  In a section of the Spokane County Sheriff’s Training Manual, concerning the shooting of an unarmed subject read something to the effect of, “you can only employ lethal force on an unarmed subject if attacked by three or more.” In those days there was little or no understanding of the “Disparity in Numbers” argument in a self-defense situation.  That line of thinking was not unique to our local agencies, and that is why so many police officers were killed during the mid-Seventies and often with their own weapons.

    Remember who used to write the policies back then?  The old guys with the gold bars on their shoulders.  The officers who haven’t worked in the field in years or even decades.  But that has changed since I was in the uniform.  It is now more common to see the practitioners who actually work in the field, i.e., patrolmen, patrol corporals and patrol sergeants involved in those studies which lead to policy changes. The present day use of force seminars sponsored by local police agencies are presented by patrol officers (patrolmen, corporals and sergeants) and detectives involved in research and development of use of force policies.

    Gold Bars Don’t Make Policy Today.  I have never attended any of those presentations where the speaker was a Lt. or Capt.  There were few exceptions to guys with gold bars presenting use of force education to officers. One exception was Dean Lydig, who was the detective Captain at the time of the shooting.  Two days after the shooting, the post shooting investigation was completed.  Captain Lydig called me into his office, closed the door behind me, sat me down and handed me the entire file, and instructed me to read every page:  The autopsy report; the WSP ballistic report; the background of the deceased; witness interviews; crime scene pictures of the damage done by the deceased in his efforts to gain entry to the complainant’s dwelling, etc. He did not disparage the patrol Lt. or the patrol Capt. who I overheard say, “Chuck is in a heap of s—!” but Capt. LYDIG did say, “How could anyone reasonably expect you to physically prevail  (I was 154 lbs., the adversary was 244 lbs with martial arts traing) with a guy like this?  Had you try to physically subdue this guy, I’d be here looking at your autopsy reports.”  In those days there was little or no understanding of the “disparity of size” argument in a self defense situation.  I should further point out that on my first day back to work after the shooting, my Sgt., pulled me aside, looked directly into my eyes and said, “If tonight you go on a call like the call last Monday morning, you do exactly the same thing you did at 0113 hrs on Monday, you understand me?” 

    That was the difference between Patrol Sgts. and the brass.  Policies are improved by guys like me who broke the rules.

    Gun Fight at GU.  I should bring the readers attention to the gun fight which took place at the Gonzaga University on November 22, 1971 A call was put out of a man with a rifle on the campus.  The Gonzaga district patrol car was two-man unit. Two well-seasoned veteran cops, were dispatched to the call.  Another two-man unit, which was close, but in a different district was occupied by two rookies, requested to back-up the primary unit.  Radio advised the rookie unit it was not necessary to back-up the primary unit, since it was a two-man unit.  As soon as Bob, the senior officer in the rookie unit, advised dispatch that he understood the instructions to disregard the back-up, he put the Motorola mike on it’s mount and told the junior officer “Screw it, we are headed for Gonzaga!”  Those two rookies saved many lives that day, including the Old Veteran cops. A gun battle erupted, the Veterans missed the bad guy, who was ultimately killed by the rookies. It should be noted that Bob was in my Spokane Police Academy class. We graduated November of 1969.

    Wait & See Policy in 1971.  The conventional policy in 1971, prevalent for most police agencies across the country, was “Wait until you see a weapon!”  At that point it is too late.  I am a graduate of the Spokane Police Academy, as well as a former Martial Arts student.  I have been taught that ACTION IS FASTER THAN REACTION.  If the defender allows the aggressor to initiate the threat of deadly force, prior to the defender being prepard to neutralize the deadly force, it is too late. As a deputy sheriff, at the first furtive/suspicious movements, I had my sidearm out of the holster and in my right hand.  If I was within striking distance of the subject, where I may have compromised my safety by reaching for my sidearm, I would immediately take the individual down and handcuff the subject.  During the 1970s so many cops were being killed, many with their own sidearm, because they were not taught the defensive tactics taught today along with ineffective use of force policies.  Even now the cops are waiting too long to shoot.  I read recently that between 2013-2015 11% of the LEOs killed in the line of duty were killed with their own weapon.  They’re still failing to control the scene and allowing the adversaries to get to close or waiting too long to shoot. Once you lose control of the scene, your safety, as well as the safety of the citizens you should be protecting, is in jeopardy.  It has always been said that there is a weapon on every call a cop goes on…the cops weapon.

    Weapon Retention Skills Are Paramount.  Many LEOs were killed after being disarmed by the bad guy.  Think about JoAnne Chesimard who killed the N.J State Trooper and  and is now in Cuba.

    FBI research confirms that LEOs were waiting too long to shoot!  My shooting was part of that research. Sadly, because of such things as the Black Lives Matter movement (based on the false narrative of hands up don’t shoot) and a citizenry which has been dumbed-down by corporate news media, public education and the NFL, the average citizen believes police are killing Black people due to invidious racial prejudice.  This same misinformation and media bias is a powerful tool aimed at armed citizens.  We have an uphill battle.

     

    Action Training Group. That is exactly why more people have to get involved with groups such as the Action Training Group.  Although the ATG is nonpolitical, members need to work individually with their legislators and with politically inclined gun groups like the NRA to keep the policies from being watered down.  If the lethal force available to the police is unduly restricted, the responsibility for armed citizens to deploy deadly force in defense of our own lives and the lives of our loved ones will also become severely restricted.  Right now, armed citizens in Washington state theoretically have broader authority to use deadly force than LEOs.

    According to the Legislative Note included with RCW 9A.16.040:

    Legislative recognition: “The legislature recognizes that RCW 9A.16.040 establishes a dual standard with respect to the use of deadly force by peace officers and private citizens, and further recognizes that private citizens’ permissible use of deadly force under the authority of RCW 9.01.200, 9A.16.020, or 9A.16.050 is not restricted and remains broader than the limitations imposed on peace officers.”

    The reality, however, is that the average person, including lawmakers, judges and attorneys and jurors, thinks that officers have broader authority in regard to the use of deadly force.  Law Enforcement Officers and armed citizens need to recognize that we all have an interest in educating the public regarding issues involving the criteria for use of deadly force.  I once read something like, “You deserve what you are willing to tolerate.  Get involved with the legislative process, because if you don’t use your rights, you will lose those rights.”

    Chuck Delgado, November, 2017

     

  • Physical Control of a Vehicle & DUI Defense in Spokane, Washington

    Physical Control and DUI in Washington State. What is the difference between a charge of Physical Control of Vehicle and DUI in Washington state? The State needs to prove that you were driving while impaired in a DUI case. However, the Prosecutor does not need to prove you were driving or even behind the wheel in a Physical Control case. Although in either case the Prosecutor has to prove you are impaired by alcohol and/or drugs, he only has to show that you were in control of the vehicle. Depending on the circumstances, that can mean being outside the vehicle with the keys in your hand while you are impaired. Additionally, a criminal defense attorney will explain that even if you have not reached the statutory ,08 BAC level, you can still be convicted of DUI- provided that the Prosecutor can convince the judge or jury that you are impaired.

    Results of BAC Tests. Even with a low BAC or no breath test, the officer will describe your condition with details that may help to convict you. Law Enforcement Officers are trained to testify in a manner that is most likely to convince a judge or a jury that you were driving while impaired. If there is .08 BAC, the court will instruct the jury to presume you were impaired and the defense attorney now has to show that the Breathalyzer machine was not functioning properly or that the test was not administered according to proper procedures.

    (more…)

  • The Action Training Group

    Church safety has become a huge issue across the United States. Many training programs and support operations have sprung up offering training and information for security teams.  The development of armed church safety teams and the relatively new industry  that has grown up to equip and train church teams is part of a massive move toward professional firearms training for gun owners that offers everything from rudimentary gun safety classes up to intensive tactical sessions for armed citizens which are also attended by SWAT teams.

    (more…)