Thursday, December 29, 2016

Nevada’s new gun background check law fails before it begins.

A new law passed at the last election would've required anyone and everyone buying a gun to undergo a background check. 

This would've included purchasing a gun at a gun show as well as private party sales. For example, let's say that your buddy has a gun collection.

Guns. Lots of guns. 
Let's say that your buddy wanted to sell a gun or two to you because he needed some free space and some money to go buy more guns. You agree on a price, you hand him some money, he hands you the gun. 

Under this new law, you've both just committed a felony crime.

However, the new law is not able to be enforced. You see, the State Law mandated that the FBI conduct these private party background checks. The State of Nevada was trying to tell the FBI what to do. 

The new law was set to go into effect this Sunday, January 1st, but on December 14th, the FBI was like:

Uh. NO. 
So, in effect, this law died before it lived. So sad. /s

If you've been charged with a gun crime, give my office a call.  

Friday, September 9, 2016

DUI Consequences - Criminal and Administrative

We spend a fair amount of time talking about DUI here...

... but we are in Las Vegas, after all. One thing that a lot of people seem to misunderstand about getting in trouble for DUI is that you actually get punished twice. 

So this is where "over a barrel" comes from... ouch!

Many people don't realize this, or forget, but having a driver's license is not a right to which you are guaranteed. Having a driver's license is a privilege which is extended to you once you attain a certain age and pass a certain number of tests. In Nevada, possessing a driver's license is also a contract between you and the state. When you sign for your license, you are actually promising that you will never drive under the influence of alcohol or drugs and you are also giving consent to be tested if you are detained by law enforcement under suspicion of driving under the influence. 

What this means in simple terms is that if you have been arrested for the crime of Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol or Drugs, there are now TWO entities you are in trouble with!

It's the modern-day equivalent of
"Wait until your father gets home!"
See, an arrest for DUI obviously gets you into trouble with the law. This takes the form of going to jail and then having to stand before a judge where you may receive a sentence in the form of jail time, hefty monetary fines, community service and/or classes and presentations about how driving drunk affects the lives of others. These types of punishments can take away your freedom for a period of time and typically will cost you many, many thousands of dollars. 

Drivin' drunk? That's a paddlin'.

What people sometimes don't realize is that when you get arrested for DUI, you are also in hot water with the Department of Motor Vehicles. And what really surprises people is that even if your criminal case gets dismissed or reduced to something less, like reckless driving, DMV STILL PUNISHES YOU FOR GETTING CAUGHT DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE! 

See, when you get arrested for DUI and then hire a lawyer, the lawyer's job is to pick through your arrest with a fine-tooth comb and see if the officer(s) who arrested you made any mistakes. If there are any cracks in the case filed against you, your lawyer may have some leverage in court to get your criminal case reduced so you may possibly be convicted of something other than DUI. However, DMV, much like honey badger, don't care. 

At that point, DMV may as well change their name to IDGAF because no matter happens in court they will suspend your driver's license for at least 90 days! 

And here's the thing, you may think: "who cares? I'll just drive without my license!" 

Well, you may not want to risk that, because many times, when the court agrees to reduce your criminal charges to something more pleasant than a DUI, they do it with a few conditions. In 99% of these cases, one of the conditions is a 'Stay Out Of Trouble' order. Normally the court will order you to STAY OUT OF TROUBLE for one year, under the penalty of a suspended sentence. 

It's like the court is saying:
Okay, we'll cut you some slack this time and let you off easy, but we want to make sure you have really learned your lesson, so we'll be watching you. If you mess up, we're really going to screw you hard. 
If you violate your Stay Out Of Trouble order, you risk ruining the whole deal the court gave you. In fact, if you violate the SOOT order, you may even be arrested and forced to serve out your suspended jail sentence! 

Of course the easiest way to avoid all of this is to not drive after you've had ANY alcohol or drugs (even prescriptions). Remember, Uber and Lyft are your friends! 

However, if you have found yourself on the wrong side of the criminal justice system, give me a call!

Wednesday, June 29, 2016

Nevada backs down on "Kidnapping" statute - and why this is a good thing.


Say the word these days and many people will immediately think of something like this:

This is the 2000's equivalent of "My name is Indigo Montoya. You keeled my father. Prepare to die."
"I don't know who you are. I don't know what you want. If you are looking for ransom I can tell you I don't have money, but what I do have are a very particular set of skills. Skills I have acquired over a very long career. Skills that make me a nightmare for people like you. If you let my daughter go now that'll be the end of it. I will not look for you, I will not pursue you, but if you don't, I will look for you, I will find you and I will kill you."
Or, even more horribly, something like this:

It's like Dr. Seuss and Shel Silverstein's nightmares combined, went to hell, and then woke up Walt Disney...
This part made Chitty Chitty Bang Bang WAY creepier than it had any right to be.
But, as is the case with most Nevada law, the prosecution tends to play fast & loose with its application. Most notably, it has been applied as a way to throw extra (and unnecessary) charges at teachers who were having consensual relationships with 16-18 year old students - relationships, I might add, that would've been completely legal had the teacher/student relationship not been at issue as the age of consent in Nevada is 16. 

Our... extremely motivated... district attorneys will sometimes throw a lot of charges at someone just to see what sticks, regardless if they are appropriate to the given situation. Recently, a teacher was sentenced to 6-15 years largely because he was convicted of several kidnapping charges that were tacked on to his 'sexual misconduct' case. 

Unfortunately, in that case, the charges stuck. However, as of April 21, 2016, a new Nevada Supreme Court opinion has come down and found that:

  • The language contained in NRS 200.310(1) about the kidnappers "intent to keep" is ambiguous because the statutory language lends itself to two or more reasonable interpretations. 
  • Pursuant to Haney v. State: "If the statute is ambiguous, then this court will look beyond the statutory language itself to determine the legislative intent of the Statute" and 
  • The rule of lenity "demands that ambiguities in criminal statutes be liberally interpreted in the accused's favor."
There's a lot more case law and legal-ese I could put in here, but I'd rather make you laugh than put you to sleep, so let's just say that this is actually a good thing. Our prosecutors in this state have been making up their own rules for far too long. 

If you want to read more about this decision, you can look it up: Just Google 132 Nev., Advance Opinion 26 or Michael J. Schofield v. State of Nevada. 

Have a happy 4th of July, everyone. 

Thursday, June 23, 2016

A last minute effort to halt the draconian Adam Walsh Act from being enforced next month.

In 2007, Nevada legislature passed (or voted to adopt) the Federal Adam Walsh Act - a Federal Law designed to "protect" the public from "dangerous" sex offenders. 

Since 2007 the actual implementation of the law has been stalled due to various appeals. 

Recently, the Nevada Supreme Court had had enough and voted to implement the Adam Walsh act without further delay. 

Why is this a problem? 

Shouldn't the public be protected from dangerous sex offenders? 

Well. Yes, of course. 

Aside from the fact that several studies over the past few decades clearly show that sex offender registries in and of themselves do almost nothing to "protect" anyone from being the victim of a crime and simply waste taxpayer money and law enforcement resources, the Adam Walsh Act is ridiculously broad, extreme and oppressive. 

For example, under Nevada’s previous law, people convicted of sex crimes (which, in some cases could be something as mild as being arrested for urinating in public) were assessed on their risk of re-offending. Thousands of offenders who were deemed low risk, or a Tier 1, were not subject to community notification. Under the new law, which applies to offenses dating to 1956, tier levels are based on the offense committed, regardless of circumstances. Many offenders already deemed by a judge to be no threat to the community will now have their names, photos and addresses available for public scrutiny.

Many previously classified as a Tier 1 (low risk or NO risk) are now reassessed as a Tier 3 (very high risk, sometimes called "sexually violent predator") and will be subject to lifetime reporting requirements. The plaintiffs fear they will lose their jobs or businesses, be forced from their homes or have the safety of their families jeopardized when their employers and neighbors discover their status.
There's another problem in what you just read. I put it in bold for you. This law goes back to anyone convicted of a crime SINCE 1956. Folks... in 1956 IT WAS ILLEGAL TO BE GAY. So let's say that there's someone out there, in Nevada, alive today who was arrested for having homosexual sex in 1962. Thanks to this new law, that person is now instantly considered a sex offender! 

What the hell is wrong with our legal system?

Here's an excerpt from the very well-written article in today Review Journal:
Vicki Henry, with the group Women Against Registry, also raised concerns about the law, saying it will “destroy the families of those who have lived a law-abiding life for the last 20, 30, 40 or 50 years.”
“We will have registrants losing their jobs, homes foreclosed on, and children beaten up, homes burned, property damaged and wives losing their jobs when someone learns they are married to a registrant,” she said in a statement.
She said the law will essentially “place a target on the backs of all living at any address listed on a public registry.”
Among other things, the lawsuit claims the state has tried to enforce the law against people convicted of offenses that are no longer crimes and against people who have obtained court order relieving them of their obligation to register as a sex offender.
One plaintiff, identified as Doe 3, pleaded guilty in 1961 when he was 19 years old in California to a misdemeanor counts of indecent exposure and annoying a minor. He was not required to register as an offender. Now 74 and the father of four adult children, he will be required to register as a Tier 1 offender and be subject to community notification.
Another, Doe 5, pleaded no contest in 1997 in Florida to one count of solicitation of a child via computer. At the time of sentencing, he received a withheld adjudication, meaning he has no criminal conviction, the lawsuit said. Earlier this month, the businessman was informed by Nevada that he would be classified as a Tier 3 and subject to lifetime registration and community notification. He also must report in person to law enforcement every three months.
Doe 7 was released for lifetime supervision by the state Parole Board in 2011 and in April a court terminated his requirement to register as a sex offender. But the Department of Public Safety told him this month that he would be designated as Tier 3. (The highest risk category available!)
The lawsuit also claims the law is unclear about how long different tiers must register for and when the clock starts, and fails to address how the state will identify people who were previously not required to register.
It further argues the law breaches deals some offenders reached years ago with prosecutors when they entered guilty pleas.
The law, the filing said, “is unjust, oppressive, vague, unenforceable, arbitrary and vindictive, and is equivalent to imposing new probation, parole, lifetime supervision or other criminal sanctions on plaintiffs.”
It also argued it will not promote public safety and will disrupt the criminal justice system by deterring defendants from entering into plea agreements.
If you share my frustration with this new law, please take a moment to write to your legislators and representatives. You may think, "well, I'm not a sex offender, so this doesn't affect me." But think of it this way: Maybe one day the government will slap a label on YOU and then it won't be so funny.

Here's the link to the RJ:

Monday, June 20, 2016

What does Nevada consider to be a "Dangerous Weapon"?

It's surprising how many people don't know what they can be arrested for and end up with probation or prison time just for carrying. 

Dangerous Weapons. 

You want a little thunder? A little lightning?

Male machismo aside, you can get into some serious trouble for carrying around certain things here in Nevada. 

If you get caught by law enforcement in possession of any of the following, you're looking at being arrested for a Gross Misdemeanor or a Felony, depending upon the circumstances:

  • Any Belt-Buckle knife
  • Any switchblade where the blade is longer than 2 inches
  • Any blackjack
I just KNEW these were illegal!
No, not that kind of blackjack.... this kind:

Yes... yes... we all know what it looks like... 
  • Slingshot
  • Billy Club
  • Sand Club
  • Nunchaku - or as everyone calls them "nun-chucks" 
Bruce Lee not included.
  • Trefoil - the fancy term for a throwing star.
  • and everyone's favorite: BRASS KNUCKLES. No, the cops don't care that you claim they're a paperweight, no, they don't care that you have buckled your belt with them.... if you get caught carrying brass knuckles, you will go to jail!


If you possess a RIFLE with a barrel less than 16 inches or an overall length of less than 26 inches, or a SHOTGUN with a barrel less than 18 inches or an overall length of less than 26 inches, you're committing a felony. 

If you have been charged with any of these crimes, call my office for experienced and aggressive representation. 702-435-2121

Tuesday, June 14, 2016

In Support of Orlando and the Gay Community

We would like to take a few moments to pay tribute to the men and women who lost their lives in the senseless tragedy that unfolded a few days ago in Orlando. 

It is a sobering reminder that humans are capable of the most beautiful dreams and, simultaneously, the most horrendous nightmares. You can never truly know what's going on inside someone's head if they don't want you to know. 

The outpouring of love and support for Orlando and the gay community in these past few days are a reminder of just how well we can all get along if and when we want to; although it's sad that it normally takes a tragedy for such solidarity to manifest. Otherwise we're all engrossed in our own little worlds, honking and flipping each other off in traffic. 

Today, before the feeling of unity fades away, take a minute to tell someone you love how you really feel. You never know if that may be the last time you get the chance. 

“Not one day in anyone’s life is an uneventful day, no day without profound meaning, no matter how dull and boring it might seem, no matter whether you are a seamstress or a queen, a shoeshine boy or a movie star, a renowned philosopher or a Down’s-syndrome child. Because in every day of your life, there are opportunities to perform little kindnesses for others, both by conscious acts of will and unconscious example. Each smallest act of kindness—even just words of hope when they are needed, the remembrance of a birthday, a compliment that engenders a smile—reverberates across great distances and spans of time, affecting lives unknown to the one whose generous spirit was the source of this good echo, because kindness is passed on and grows each time it’s passed, until a simple courtesy becomes an act of selfless courage years later and far away. Likewise, each small meanness, each thoughtless expression of hatred, each envious and bitter act, regardless of how petty, can inspire others, and is therefore the seed that ultimately produces evil fruit, poisoning people whom you have never met and never will. All human lives are so profoundly and intricately entwined—those dead, those living, those generations yet to come—that the fate of all is the fate of each, and the hope of humanity rests in every heart and in every pair of hands. Therefore, after every failure, we are obliged to strive again for success, and when faced with the end of one thing, we must build something new and better in the ashes, just as from pain and grief, we must weave hope, for each of us is a thread critical to the strength—to the very survival of the human tapestry. Every hour in every life contains such often-unrecognized potential to affect the world that the great days and thrilling possibilities are combined always in this momentous day.” ― Dean KoontzFrom the Corner of His Eye

Monday, June 13, 2016

The Cost of the "War on Drugs" is Too High!

Today, I'd like to share with you a 'Letter to the Editor' of our local newspaper, the Las Vegas Review Journal. 

This was written by my colleague and friend, Christopher Tilman, and I agree with him 100%

Contrary to what was expressed in the editorial, marijuana is not a gateway drug — and this has been disproved repeatedly. Likewise, marijuana does not cause cancer, mental illness, birth defects or irreversible brain damage, as was opined. Additionally, marijuana is not physically addictive and there has been no documented overdose death from its use.
While it is true there is a possible link to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in heavy users, this has been found in people who smoke tobacco and marijuana together, so the data is not clear on those who smoke only marijuana.
As to the half truth that the savings to the taxpayer will be negligible, consider that even if there are “only” 90 state prisoners who would be freed, that would save $30,000 per year per prisoner (the cost to incarcerate one prisoner per year in Nevada). That’s $2.7 million per year.
What was not said in the opinion is the cost of police enforcement, prosecution and court time to go after the people arrested for personal use. This is a massive waste of time and resources. The tax benefits that the editorial seems to gloss over are likewise not negligible. Tax revenue projections here are in the $80 million to $100 million per year range due to our tourist-based economy. How this can be ignored is beyond me.
As a criminal defense attorney in Nevada I make money from the current marijuana laws. However, the cost — financial and to our civil liberties — of marijuana’s illegal status and the potential revenue from legalizing recreational marijuana are not something we can look at with a narrow, outdated view that we know does not work.
We are losing our civil liberties because of the drug war and we cannot afford to prosecute adults as part of marijuana prohibition. We need to vote to legalize recreational marijuana.
Christopher Tilman

Thursday, June 9, 2016

As Americans we view Gun Ownership as our Right...

But certain things can affect your right to buy, own, 
or even HOLD a gun!

Nevada Revised Statute 202.360 is the law responsible for this. It governs 
"Prohibited Person in Possession of a Firearm"

1. a person who is prohibited from firearm possession (notice it doesn't say ownership) is one or more of the following:
a) Ex-Felon: Someone who has been convicted of a felony crime in this or any other state.
b) Fugitive From Justice:
I didn't kill my wife!!
 A fugitive is a person who is charged in another state with the commission of a felony and has fled from that state to avoid prosecution, or is fleeing from another state to avoid giving testimony in any criminal proceeding.
c) Habitual Drug Users: 
Disclaimer: for satire purposes only. Tommy Chong is a wonderful,
delightful, law-abiding citizen and his photo in this context is not
meant to imply otherwise. 
d) A person who has been adjudicated (by the Court) as Mentally Ill, or has been committed to any mental health facility. 

 e) Illegal Alien: Any person who is illegally or unlawfully present in the United States.

Now, again, I'm not just talking about being prohibited from OWNING a gun or BUYING a gun. The law is very specific and states that if any one of the above-described persons so much as:

"...owns or has in his possession or under his custody or control ANY FIREARM that is loaded, unloaded, operable or inoperable."

Take a good look at that last bit and let that sink in. Under your custody or control can be WILDLY and broadly construed by Law Enforcement. I'm about to go full "Sophia" from The Golden Girls:

Picture it: a warm summer day in Las Vegas, 2016. You've been convicted of a felony, but that was years ago. You've since served out your sentence, changed your life and are now, for all intents and purposes, a kind, decent, hard-working, productive human being, and you rarely think about the ugly label of "EX FELON" that society would have you wear as though it were a large red "A" and your name was Hester Prynne. But I digress. Your friend is coming over and you two are going out to do a little shopping, maybe grab some lunch, who knows. Your friend has never been arrested and enjoys the freedoms of the 2nd amendment combined with Nevada's Open Carry laws by carrying a gun most places they go.
So, you and your friend hop into your car and go. A few minutes go by and your friend says that he needs to swing by the bank to cash a check so he has some spare cash for impulse shopping. He decides that he's just going to run into the bank real quick, and it's hot, so you stay in the car and leave it running for the A/C. But it's a bank and your friend isn't an idiot so he decides to leave his gun in the car for a second while he runs in.
He unfastens his holster, leaves the gun on the floor of the passenger seat and runs into the bank. There's a queue. You're waiting, playing Angry Birds or whatever and just as you're about to rescue the eggs from those stupid pigs, a police officer taps on your window. See, he was just leaving the restaurant that's right behind you after his lunch break and he saw you waiting outside a bank with the engine running and figured that he'd run your license plate just for the hell of it.
...And your felony conviction popped up on his computer. Now, from a cop's perspective, he sees a known felon sitting in an idling car outside a bank. ...what do you think is going through his head?
Anyway, he taps on your window, and in your 'distracted-by-egg-stealing-pigs' state you drop the window. He sees the gun on your floor and the next thing you see is:
If you were holding any measurable quantity of urine before this moment, it's
likely moistening your upholstery right now...
Next thing you know, you're out of the car, in handcuffs, your car is being sealed pending the officers obtaining a telephonic search warrant so that they can legally recover the firearm (there goes 3 hours of your day) and, considering the batch of cops you get and how persuasive your friend is, you may, or may not be arrested on a fresh felony for being an Ex Felon with a firearm under your custody or control.

Things like this happen all-too-frequently in our society and if something like this has happened to you, call my office right away!

Wednesday, June 8, 2016

Open and Gross Lewdness

Open and Gross Lewdness. Most folks read those four words and think they immediately know what it must mean. 

But the legal definition is a bit more broad than you might think. 

It typically comprises the following two circumstances:
  1. any intentional sexual act that is done either in public or in a private place in an open way where others could see it; OR
  2. any sexual encounter that is non-consensual but falls short of actual rape.
An example of #1 could be someone masturbating in front of an open window while watching people pass by. This person is making no effort to conceal himself or herself and anyone who glances in that direction will see everything!

An example of #2 might be a person who just walks up to a woman in a bar and starts to grope her breasts, or perhaps someone who grabs a man's crotch without his consent. 

The difference between open or gross lewdness and the Nevada crime of sexual assault (the legal term for rape) is that sexual assault involves penetration. This includes sexual intercourse, oral sex, anal sex, digital sex ("fingering"), or inserting an object into a bodily orifice in a sexual way.

Indecent Exposure v. Open or Gross Lewdness

In many cases, prosecutors bring open or gross lewdness charges in conjunction with charges of the Nevada crime of indecent exposure. Indecent exposure is defined as "any open and indecent or obscene exposure of his/her person, or of another person." An example would be to expose someone's buttocks, breasts or genitalia in a place where others could see.
In 5.... 4..... 3..... 2..... *gasp!* 

The main difference between the Nevada crimes of indecent exposure and open or gross lewdness is that open and gross lewdness tends to refer to sexual acts, whereas indecent exposure refers to baring private body parts whether or not it is sexually motivated. 
The penalties for committing the Nevada offense of open or gross lewdness varies depending upon whether this is someone's first arrest/conviction for open or gross lewdness:
A first offense of open or gross lewdness is a gross misdemeanor in Nevada. The punishment includes:
  • up to 364 days in jail and/or up to $2,000 in fines, and
  • sex offender registration
A subsequent offense of open or gross lewdness is a category D felony in Nevada. The punishment carries:
  • one to four years in Nevada State Prison (with a possible fine of up to $5,000), and
  • sex offender registration

Indecent Exposure penalties

The penalties for a Nevada violation of indecent exposure law are the same as the penalties for open or gross lewdness:
A first offense of indecent exposure is a gross misdemeanor in Nevada, carrying a sentence of:
  • up to one year in jail and/or up to $2,000 in fines, and
  • sex offender registration
A subsequent offense of indecent exposure is a category D felony in Nevada, carrying a sentence of:
  • one to four years in Nevada state prison (with a possible fine of up to $5,000), and
  • sex offender registration
Note that open or gross lewdness may be a crime of crime of moral turpitude in Nevada. This means that aliens may be removed from the U.S. for it. Learn more about Nevada immigration laws.

If you have been arrested for one of these crimes, of think that someone may accuse you of these crimes, call my office right away so we can be ahead of the game!
Louis C. Schneider is your best defense!

Friday, June 3, 2016

Child Abuse / Child Neglect / Child Endangerment

What are the legal definitions of Child Abuse, Neglect or Endangerment?

Okay, so normally I try to keep this blog delightfully light, mildly funny, and (hopefully) informative, and this is a very sensitive topic. I don't want anything to think we're making light of child abuse, because we're absolutely not. No one should ever hurt or abuse a child for any reason. 

However, what we, as a Criminal Defense Law Firm realize, and wish to impress upon you, the reader, is that sometimes law enforcement and/or the district attorney can be a bit.... aggressive or ambitious with the application of existing laws where it doesn't necessarily apply. 

If you've been charged with one of these crimes, the odds are that you are not a hard-core monster who delights in maiming small children. Actually, it's far more likely that you're just a regular person who found yourself in an extraordinary situation and things spun rapidly out of control, someone called the police, someone had a visible injury, and, in order to 'handle' the call, the police decided to make an arrest, and the closest charge that fit the circumstances is Child Abuse, or Neglect, or Endangerment. 

With that said:

Sadly, our criminal prosecution too frequently goes full
Helen Lovejoy when it's simply not warranted.

Unfortunately, many of the laws we have carry titles that make them sound downright draconian, far more so than the actual circumstances that took place. For example, take this situation:

Divorced parents have a teenage daughter who is exhibiting some normal teenage behavior issues: she's defiant, disobedient; she doesn't want to live with mom because mom's house has "too many rules" and lives with dad instead. She wears clothes that are too revealing, she wears too much makeup...
Cake? or DEATH?
 ...and has various parts of her anatomy pierced. One day, dad comes home from work early, unannounced. He walks in to find his daughter and an unknown teenage boy together, in the process of getting drunk. As likely any father would, he becomes immediately enraged and confronts his daughter. She screams back at him and refuses to acknowledge that she's doing anything wrong and calls him a bunch of unpleasant names. He ultimately he ends up slapping her a few times. 

Should he have physically struck his daughter? No, probably not. 

But, does anyone really think that this situation called for the dad to be arrested on Felony Child Abuse charges? Really? Should dad really be labelled a Felon for the rest of his life because of this one instance? 

That's for you to decide, but I know that my parents definitely knocked some sense into me when I was little, and I certainly do not consider that to have been "ABUSE" by any stretch of the imagination. 

The police and the D.A., however, have decided to charge this man with a Felony for this exact situation. 

It's easy to pass judgement from the safety of your own home, or be brave behind your own keyboard, but put yourself in the same situation and think about how YOU would feel if it was you sitting in jail, possibly losing your job, dealing with life as an ex-felon in America, all for something as simple as slapping your defiant, drunken, promiscuous teenage daughter because you care about the mistakes she's making and the consequences they may have for her. 

But I digress.

Nevada defines CHILD ABUSE and/or NEGLECT and/or ENDANGERMENT thusly:

 NRS 200.508  Abuse, neglect or endangerment of child: Penalties; definitions.
      1.  A person who willfully causes a child who is less than 18 years of age to suffer unjustifiable physical pain or mental suffering as a result of abuse or neglect or to be placed in a situation where the child may suffer physical pain or mental suffering as the result of abuse or neglect:
      (a) If substantial bodily or mental harm results to the child:
             (1) If the child is less than 14 years of age and the harm is the result of sexual abuse or exploitation, is guilty of a category A felony and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for life with the possibility of parole, with eligibility for parole beginning when a minimum of 15 years has been served; or
             (2) In all other such cases to which subparagraph (1) does not apply, is guilty of a category B felony and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for a minimum term of not less than 2 years and a maximum term of not more than 20 years; or
      (b) If substantial bodily or mental harm does not result to the child:
             (1) If the person has not previously been convicted of a violation of this section or of a violation of the law of any other jurisdiction that prohibits the same or similar conduct, is guilty of a category B felony and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for a minimum term of not less than 1 year and a maximum term of not more than 6 years; or
             (2) If the person has previously been convicted of a violation of this section or of a violation of the law of any other jurisdiction that prohibits the same or similar conduct, is guilty of a category B felony and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for a minimum term of not less than 2 years and a maximum term of not more than 15 years,
Ê unless a more severe penalty is prescribed by law for an act or omission that brings about the abuse or neglect.
      2.  A person who is responsible for the safety or welfare of a child and who permits or allows that child to suffer unjustifiable physical pain or mental suffering as a result of abuse or neglect or to be placed in a situation where the child may suffer physical pain or mental suffering as the result of abuse or neglect:
      (a) If substantial bodily or mental harm results to the child:
             (1) If the child is less than 14 years of age and the harm is the result of sexual abuse or exploitation, is guilty of a category A felony and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for life with the possibility of parole, with eligibility for parole beginning when a minimum of 10 years has been served; or
             (2) In all other such cases to which subparagraph (1) does not apply, is guilty of a category B felony and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for a minimum term of not less than 2 years and a maximum term of not more than 20 years; or
      (b) If substantial bodily or mental harm does not result to the child:
             (1) If the person has not previously been convicted of a violation of this section or of a violation of the law of any other jurisdiction that prohibits the same or similar conduct, is guilty of a gross misdemeanor; or
             (2) If the person has previously been convicted of a violation of this section or of a violation of the law of any other jurisdiction that prohibits the same or similar conduct, is guilty of a category C felony and shall be punished as provided in NRS 193.130,
Ê unless a more severe penalty is prescribed by law for an act or omission that brings about the abuse or neglect.
      3.  A person does not commit a violation of subsection 1 or 2 by virtue of the sole fact that the person delivers or allows the delivery of a child to a provider of emergency services pursuant to NRS 432B.630.
      4.  As used in this section:
      (a) “Abuse or neglect” means physical or mental injury of a nonaccidental nature, sexual abuse, sexual exploitation, negligent treatment or maltreatment of a child under the age of 18 years, as set forth in paragraph (d) and NRS 432B.070432B.100432B.110432B.140 and 432B.150, under circumstances which indicate that the child’s health or welfare is harmed or threatened with harm.
      (b) “Allow” means to do nothing to prevent or stop the abuse or neglect of a child in circumstances where the person knows or has reason to know that the child is abused or neglected.
      (c) “Permit” means permission that a reasonable person would not grant and which amounts to a neglect of responsibility attending the care, custody and control of a minor child.
      (d) “Physical injury” means:
             (1) Permanent or temporary disfigurement; or
             (2) Impairment of any bodily function or organ of the body.
      (e) “Substantial mental harm” means an injury to the intellectual or psychological capacity or the emotional condition of a child as evidenced by an observable and substantial impairment of the ability of the child to function within his or her normal range of performance or behavior. 

If you've been accused of a crime against a child, give Louis Schneider a call at 702-435-2121 to start building your defense right away!

Thursday, May 26, 2016

So, you got a DUI...

Disapproval Squirrel stands in judgment.

Veni Vidi Bibi. I came. I saw. I drank. 

You weren't planning on it. You were planning on a quiet evening at home. Maybe some ice cream and binge-watching some Game of Thrones in your comfy clothes. But no. 

Your friend called. 

You know who I'm talking about. 

That one friend who carefully weaves fun persuasion into a masterfully-crafted, perfectly-worded quasi-guilt trip and can usually talk you into just about anything. 

The next thing you know, one beer turns into 4 and then some dumb*** starts ordering shots. 

It's all fun and games until about 4 hours later and:

If you're not the guy in the striped pants, this is totally not cool.

The only thing worse than a hangover... a hangover in jail...

So what happens now? 

Well, it depends on your unique situation:
  • Is this your first offense? 
  • Was there an accident?
  • Did you take a breath or blood test?
  • Did the officer get the evidentiary test within 2 hours of stopping you?
  • Did you punch the officer at any point during your arrest? (You know who you are.)
But generally speaking, you're going to spend some time in jail. At the bare minimum 12 hours - likely longer, from 2-4 days. 

Your car was probably towed at an exorbitant cost and is, right now, accruing a daily storage fee for every day you haven't retrieved it. 

Once DMV gets notified that you've been arrested for DUI, they are going to suspend your driver's license for at least 90 days. 


Most people don't realize this. Even if your criminal case gets reduced to a reckless driving, or is thrown out altogether, DMV will still punish you. 

If you've been arrested for a DUI, please call Louis Schneider immediately for representation. There are ways to defend you against the charges of DUI! 702-435-2121