Click to call 602-307-0808 24/7 Click Here for Free Consultation

Blog Posts

How an Arizona Sex Crimes Attorney Client Can Be Affected by the Adam Walsh Act

Ask any sex crimes attorney in Arizona. The Adam Walsh Act, enacted in 2006, is the most complex, progressive and punitive sex offender law ever enacted. It was done in response to the public outcry as well as political outcry over sexual offenders and the threat they present to society. The law was grounded in conception by several noteworthy child sexual homicides, and in fact, names a handful of these children. In essence, the statute enhances penalties for already existing sexual federal offenses as well as creates new federal sexual offenses that the client of a sex crimes attorney may be charged with.

Most importantly, the act establishes the Sexual Offender Registration and Notification Act, creating a national registry of sexual offenders that law enforcement officers may use to access information about sexual offenders in order to efficiently track them throughout the country. The law delineates risk levels for community registration and notification on a 3 tiered system that is offense based rather than risk based.

Essentially, the AWA requires stricter juvenile sexual offender notification elements that can conflict with the rehabilitative process of the client of a sex crimes attorney. The law also restricts the ability of a sex crimes attorney to access evidence regarding computer pornography crimes, which can affect their ability to prepare for trial.

AWA Sexual Offender Civil Commitment Statute

The AWA also created the Jimmy Ryce Civil Commitment Program that established civil commitment procedures for federal sexual offenders. This may be in fact the most castigating feature of the law, considering the reality of life commitment for some sexual offenders. The commitment clause had 2 primary objectives: assist funding for states that don’t have such legislation, and mandate the civil commitment of sexually dangerous federal offenders.

About 20 states entertain civil commitment statutes to confine sexually violent predators. Many states reject such legislation, primarily for funding reasons. The AWA provides grants for states to meet these financial needs.

AWA Limitations

The AWA managed to leave many areas unresolved, much to the frustration of many a sex crimes attorney in Arizona. It failed to establish a standard or burden of proof for risk to reoffend and does not permit a jury trial. The law does not conclude whether the respondent has the right to remain silent, nor does it compel him to participate in a court ordered examination. It also does not provide for a provision that compromises the possibility that disclosures about sex offending behaviors during treatment will not be used against the offender by the government to procure more commitment.

The AWA also fails to resolve discovery procedures related to the client of a sex crimes lawyer.

Most civil statutes include a “likely to reoffend” component. The AWA fails to have such a distinction. Instead, the law incorporates a volitional mandate. The definition only calls for a “serious difficulty restraining from sexually violent conduct or sexual molestation if released.”

The AWA is a harsh law that can impose significant confinements on the client of a sex crimes lawyer in Arizona. Most importantly, it presents roadblocks in the road to rehabilitation. Punishment becomes the solution while rehabilitation becomes an impossibility.

About the Author
David Michael Cantor is an AV rated (the highest possible rating) lawyer and a Certified Criminal Law Specialist per the Arizona Board of Legal Specialization. For more information about an Arizona sex crimes attorney, visit our site.


How a Good White Collar Lawyer in Arizona Can Leverage “Puffery”

The recent economic roller coaster face experienced by many corporations around the world has resulted in an unprecedented numbers of people in need of a white collar lawyer in Arizona. As the director of the FBI confirmed last fall, 24 large financial institutions have been investigated for some type of alleged fraud. Whether or not these investigations will result in a filing of charges, it is clear that the current financial crisis will bring about a wave of violations and civil suits alleging violations of the Security Exchange Act of 1934 based on purported material misstatements about a public company’s performance. These companies will soon become the clients of a white collar lawyer.

While these new cases may be bigger and have a higher profile than cases in the past, the legal issues are no different than those faced by any case involving a white collar lawyer. Most of the current cases center themselves around classic securities fraud. So while they may be bigger and more extensive, they involve the same basic issues as any other white collar crime.

A white collar defense lawyer in Arizona is likely to argue that the alleged statements were in fact not material, and therefore cannot form the basis of a legal liability. What counts as a material statement? Statements are considered material when there is a substantial likelihood that a reasonable shareholder would consider the matter relevant enough to affect his or her vote. (more…)


DUI Attorney Arizona Gets DUI Case Dismissed Due to a Miranda Rights Violation

According to court records, DUI Attorney Arizona David Michael Cantor’s office was able to convince a Globe Regional Justice Court judge to dismiss a DUI case due to the officer’s improper reading of the clients Miranda rights.

In the case of State v. Gaona (Globe Regional Justice Court Case No. TR2008002096) Gaona was arrested for an alleged DUI violation. Gaona’s original stop was due to his license plate light being burned out. He participated in only one field sobriety test, on which he performed well, and the officer administered an eye test, which he was not certified to administer. Gaona was arrested and was not told that he had the Constitutional right to speak to an attorney, which is standard in all Miranda rights readings.

At the hearing the officer never identified Gaona in court as the person who he had stopped. When the State was finished presenting their evidence, an associate of DUI Attorney Arizona David Michael Cantor made a Motion to Dismiss the case based on lack of identification and improper administration of Miranda rights. The judge agreed and the entire case was dismissed.

“This is why it is important to make sure that the prosecutors and the police officers check every single box when dealing with a defendant’s rights,” said Arizona DUI Attorney David Cantor. “In this case they failed to do so and as a result we were able to get Mr. Gaona’s case dismissed.”

DM Cantor enjoy an excellent reputation as DUI Attorneys in Arizona, and throughout the Legal Community because of their aggressiveness, integrity, honesty, and professionalism. For more information about DM Cantor visit DUI Attorney Arizona.

About DM Cantor

DM Cantor feature criminal defense attorneys in Arizona who are ready to represent you. As Arizona’s premier defense lawyer, David Michael Cantor defends DUI/ DWI cases, vehicular crimes, homicide, drug and sex offenses, white collar and property crimes. David Michael Cantor is AV Rated – the highest rating possible – and was voted a Top 100 trial lawyer. David Michael Cantor has been interviewed and has appeared on Inside Edition, the CBS Morning Show, Good Morning America, CNN Prime News, Hannitty and Combs, and every local news channel including Univision. In addition, his cases have been covered by CNN, MSNBC, and even Howard Stern.


New Arizona Photo Radar Bill HB 2085 Requires Officer to issue ticket

David M Cantor, Arizona Criminal Lawyer, discusses House Bill 2076 and House Bill 2085 (the new Arizona photo radar bill) were prefiled on January 8, 2010 to be heard at the 2010 49th Legislature Second Regular Session.  If passed, HB 2085 would require that a photo radar ticket actually be issued by a law enforcement officer, and not by mail or a process server.  Currently, if you simply ignore a photo radar ticket received in the mail nothing will happen to you.  However, if a process server claims to have served you or a member of your household, you then must show up to court.  Many process servers are unscrupulous and will simply leave the ticket on your front door and claim that service was accepted.  This new House Bill would actually be a good thing for the people of Arizona.

HB 2076, if passed, would allow an officer to issue a ticket to a person who is smoking in a car if there are any other people in the car who are under 16 years of age.  The ticket would carry a $50.00 fine for each person who is under 16.  The one limitation attached to this House Bill is that the officer cannot pull somebody over purely because they are smoking with a young child in their car.  He must have reasonable suspicion that an additional traffic violation has occurred prior to initiating his stop.  Apparently if you are 16 or 17 (i.e., unable to drink, vote, or legally have sex) you are not protected by the law from second-hand smoke.

To learn more about Arizona photo radar laws, contact DM Cantor.


Click to Watch Important Questions to Ask when Hiring a Lawyer

Request a Free Consultation

Fill out the form below to recieve a free and confidential intial consultation.


Arizona Defense Law Firm Associations and Awards
DM Cantor

Call 24/7 602-307-0808

40 N Central Ave, Ste 2300
Phoenix, AZ 85004
Click here for Directions

For Family Law questions please go to Cantor Law Group.
[contact-form-7 id="8868" title="Exit Intent"]