FindLaw Blotter - Crime Blog - Crime News - The FindLaw Crime and Criminals Blog

Two years ago, as fourteen wildfires engulfed almost 250,000 acres in California during a historic drought, we wondered whether prison inmates should really be making up 30 percent of the firefighting force in the Golden State. This week, after 41 fatalities and almost 150,000 scorched acres in Napa, Sonoma, and Yuba counties, the question isn't so much whether inmates should be fighting forest fires, but whether they should be paid more to do so.

The American Bar Association is reporting that almost 4,000 inmates in California are getting paid $1 an hour to clear and maintain fire containment lines. One bonus? For every day spent battling blazes, "incarcerated" fire fighters can shave two days off their prison sentence.

When you're being read your rights and advised of the law, you want that information to be accurate; especially if English isn't your native tongue and you're relying on a translation of your rights. But a Massachusetts woman is claiming that a local police department "has for years used an erroneous and unlawfully coercive Spanish-language advice of rights form in connection with arrests and prosecutions of Spanish-speaking Hispanic individuals" for DUI-related offenses.

And this is two years after the local district attorney admitted the form was a problem and would be working with the police department to "rectify it." Now the woman is suing the city, the police department, and the district attorney in federal court.

Maybe Worth County, Georgia Sheriff Jeff Hobby watched Lean on Me one too many times. In that movie, high school principal Morgan Freeman violates fire codes and countless other laws in order to keep his students safe from drug dealers. Perhaps that's what Hobby thought he was doing when he and 40 other officers locked down Worth County High School for four hours, ordering around 800 students up against walls, patting them down, and even demanding cell phones as part of a massive, warrantless drug search last April.

While the surprise sweep yielded no drugs whatsoever and led to zero arrests, the sheriff himself and two of his deputies were indicted on charges ranging from violation of oath of office to misdemeanor sexual battery.

Vaccinations have been a hot topic for years now, and even with little evidence they are harmful to children, many parents are choosing to not vaccinate their kids. And for the most part, that's OK, legally speaking. But there are a few exceptions to that rule, and one of them is when a judge orders you to vaccinate your child.

This week, Michigan mom Rebecca Bredow was sentenced to seven days in jail for failing to vaccinate her 9-year-old son, but her real crime was ignoring a consent order to do so.

We tend to get most of our legal information, especially in the criminal context, from television and movies, with the odd, sensationalized news story thrown in. And that's true when it comes to criminal appeals as well: prisoners on death row can delay their execution for years on appeal; good convictions get tossed out on a technicality, bad convictions get overturned after an innocent person spends decades in prison; DNA evidence exonerates someone sentenced to die.

But the appeals process isn't quite as simple as saying, "I didn't like the verdict." Nor is it as interminable as many think. Here's what you need to know about criminal appeals.

'Making a Murderer' subject Steven Avery had his motion for a new trial denied by a Wisconsin judge this week. The motion for a new trial was based upon new evidence, including DNA evidence and witnesses that were never provided to the defense by the state.

Despite losing the motion, Avery's attorney has not given up the fight. Apparently, the decision came as a surprise to both sides, as they had recently reached an agreement regarding testing certain pieces of new evidence, and amending the motion for a new trial based upon the anticipated test results. However, the judge considering the motion was unaware of the planned tests and amendment.

The Supreme Court, when not on summer vacation, is pretty busy. And the fall 2017 docket, the Court's first with new Justice Neil Gorsuch, is shaping up to be a momentous one. While the Court will be deciding a variety of cases, from the enforceability of arbitration clauses to political gerrymandering and from discriminatory bakers to sports gambling, the justices will also be weighing in on some serious criminal law cases.

Here's a look at a few of those cases, and what they could mean:

In a move sure to harsh the mellow of many a Mile High City marijuana enthusiast, Colorado is outlawing certain edibles, targeting those that might confuse children into ingesting cannabis. Not only does this mean no more pot gummy bears, but any edible "in the distinct shape of a human, animal or fruit, or a shape that bears the likeness or contains the characteristics of a realistic or fictional human, animal, or fruit, including artistic, caricature, or cartoon renderings."

The new rule goes into effect October 1, perhaps in an effort to ensure that toddlers' Halloween treats are free of any THC-laced tricks.

Hours after Stephen Paddock opened fire on a crowd of Las Vegas concertgoers, killing 58 and injuring over 500 more, his brother told reporters Paddock was "not an avid gun guy at all." "Where the hell did he get automatic weapons," Eric Paddock told CBS News. "He has no military background or anything like that."

Police discovered at least 10 guns in the Mandalay Bay hotel room from which Paddock shot, including .223 caliber and .308 caliber assault rifles. Investigators believe all of the weapons were purchased legally, although initial reports suggest some of the rifles used may have been altered to function as automatic weapons. Here's a look at Nevada's gun control laws, which may have governed the sale and possession of those weapons.

Rape kits may be invasive for victims and expensive for law enforcement, but are absolutely essential to solving sexual assault cases. DNA is one of the few pieces of forensic evidence that still stand up to scientific scrutiny, and having centralized DNA databases can stop serial sex offenders before they strike again.

Take the case of DeJenay Beckwith, who was raped in 2011 and whose rapist wasn't discovered until Harris County Texas prosecutors finally got her rape kit analyzed five years later in 2016. It turns out the man's DNA had been on file with the FBI since 1991, and he also pleaded guilty to another 2002 sexual assault, this one involving a minor. Beckwith is now suing the county, claiming the county's "persistent and intentional failure to test thousands" of rape kits was also a failure "to prevent the sexual assault of hundreds of women and juveniles, by identifiable assailants, including serial rapists."