Why Public Prosecutors File Bogus Resistance Offense Criminal Actions Against The Innocent

Jerry L. Steering, Esq. is the courtroom
Police Misconduct and Civil Rights Lawyer Jerry L. Steering, Esq.

A trial in an exercise in placing blame. Public prosecutors file bogus resistance offense criminal actions against the innocent victims of police misconduct; to shift the blame from the police officer who used force on you and falsely arrested you from them to you. This practice is so common the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has actually found that in many cases such behavior often constitutes actually felonious extortion. See, MacDonald v. Musick, 425 F.2d 373 (9th Cir. 1970). (Deputy District Attorney and Court conditioning the dismissal of DUI charges in exchange for stipulation for probable cause for arrest of defendant constitutes extortion under California law).

WHY PUBLIC PROSECUTORS FILE BOGUS RESISTANCE OFFENSE CRIMINAL ACTIONS AGAINST THE INNOCENT VICTIMS OF POLICE MISCONDUCT

San Bernardino County District Attorney Michael Ramos ran his office to prosecute the victims of crimes by police officers to protect the officers and to garner their political support. He was finally voted out of office in 2018 for falsely prosecuting wealthy defendants who could do something about him.

When the police use force on you or otherwise beat you badly, young ambitious Deputy District Attorneys routinely use the criminal process to shift the blame for the officer having to use force from the police to their victims. They do this by falsely and maliciously filing bogus resistance offense criminal actions against the innocent victims of police beatings of crimes against the violating officer; These Resistance Offense Criminal Actions include: 1) Cal. Penal Code § 148(a)(1) (resisting / obstructing / delaying peace officer); 2) Cal. Penal Code § 240 / 241(c)) (assault on a peace officer); 3) Cal. Penal Code § 242 / 243(b) (battery on a peace officer); and 4) Cal. Penal Code § 69 (interfering with public officer via actual or threatened use of force or violence.) Cal. Penal Code § 69 is a “wobbler”; a California public offense that may be filed by the District Attorney’s Office as either a felony or a misdemeanor. In Orange County, Riverside County and Los Angeles County, allegations of violation of Cal. Penal Code § 69 are usually filed as misdemeanors.

In San Bernardino County, however, allegations of violation of Cal. Penal Code § 69 are filed as felonies more often than her sister counties. Mr. Steering has advised or consulted on, or have represented clients in, literally thousands, of these “contempt of cop” Resistance Offense Criminal Actions; both civil and criminal. By far, the most commonly abused criminal in California is the primary “contempt of cop” statute; violation of Cal. Penal Code § 148(a)(1).

THE POLICE ARE NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTED OR DISCIPLINING THEIR OWN.

Police agencies will almost always back the police officer who beat you, tased you, shot you, pepper-sprayed you, falsely arrested you, submitted false police reports to get you criminally prosecuted, or otherwise abused you. They will destroy evidence, conceal evidence, fabricate evidence, author false police reports, procure false and malicious criminal prosecutions. They procure your bogus Resistance Offense Criminal Actions for resisting / obstructing / delaying peace officer, assault and battery on a peace officer, and other similar frame-up to cover crimes/torts by cops, and suborn perjury. They will do (almost) anything that will tend to exonerate the officer who victimized you. They do this by falsely prosecuting you.

These cases are, for the most part, misdemeanor criminal prosecutions. Some of the creepier prosecutors think that they’re actually doing you a favor, by allowing you to plead away your civil claims and give you a minor conviction (i.e. misdemeanor, infraction or a plea with a deferred entry of judgment.) Moreover, the deck is staked against you to the maximum extent permitted by law. For example, in Orange County, California, the Court will only provide a Court Reporter for a misdemeanor criminal case, if the defendant is indigent. Otherwise, you can pay the Court Reporters fee for the trial (probably about $1,500.00 per day if you’re lucky; as if the defendant can even afford the lawyer.)

Moreover, the prosecutors in these “contempt of cop“ / Resistance Offense Criminal Actions, are usually young and aggressive newer lawyers, who are learning to be trial lawyers by prosecuting misdemeanors, and seeking to make a name for themselves. Many of them see these “contempt of cop” type cases, as an opportunity to increase their influence with the various police agencies that they are protecting from obloquy, and civil and criminal liability, as well as their rising star status with the DA’s office.

MANY PROSECUTORS WITHHOLD EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE FROM INNOCENTS FOR CAREER ADVANCEMENT.

Nothing like a winning streak of criminal convictions to enhance the career prospects for a Deputy District Attorney. That’s all fine and good so long as the Deputy District Attorney plays the rules. However, those prosecutorial winning streaks may not be so long if the Deputy District Attorney withholds exculpatory evidence.

The Orange County District Attorney’s Office and the Orange County Sheriff’s Department have been turning “cold cases” into hot ones by using illegal jail informants. These “informants” were not really informants at all. They were real deal Mexican Mafia gangsters who were trying to get criminal sentence reductions by framing persons.

When the police suspected persons of having committed crimes, but had no proof of their guilt, They placed them in jail cells with Mexican Mafia dropouts, who threatened them to make incriminating statements that were surreptitiously recorded, or face jail beatings or death. This is no joke. It’s known as the Orange County Jailhouse Snitch Scandal.

YOUNG PROSECUTORS DON’T HAVE TIME TO THOROUGHLY REVIEW YOUR BOGUS RESISTING ARREST * BATTERY ON PEACE OFFICER CASE BEFORE FILING IT AGAINST YOU.

Young and ambitious Deputy District Attorneys review between 20 to 30 cases per day for consideration for filing criminal charges. That is no joke. If they review 20 cases in an eight hour work day that means that they have 24 minutes per case to look at the “package” submitted to the District Attorney’s Office by the arresting police agency, if they did nothing else that day. Moreover, these “packages” from the arresting police agency usually only consist of the basic arrest report and maybe a Probable Cause for Warrantless Arrest Declaration. That’s it. They don’t get any videos or audios or any of the other evidence in the case; just basically the police report.

Most Deputy District Attorneys are not Fourth Amendment Search and Seizure Scholars when it comes to the law regarding and involving Resistance Offense. It takes more than 24 minutes to look up the applicable cases and Constitutional Doctrines to understand the law in this area. Therefore, these resistance arrest cases often get filed against innocents without much if any legal and factual scrutiny from the District Attorney’s Office.

SOME PROSECUTORS MAKE A NAME FOR THEMSELVES BY FRAMING INNOCENTS.

In City’s such as Los Angeles and Anaheim, the City Attorneys Office prosecutes misdemeanor offenses, and the District Attorneys office still prosecutes felonies. These City Attorneys Offices, are the very same agencies that are charged with defending the City coffers, from being depleted by lawsuits brought by victims of Constitutional violations, perpetrated upon the criminal defendant that they are prosecuting. If the police misconduct victim, pleads guilty, then, generally, they are barred from suing for a false arrest, and sometimes even from suing for excessive force.

That all being the case, many Deputy District Attorneys and City Attorneys are quite motivated to “Frame The Innocent”; to emotionally and financially beat-down, and (primarily) to civilly impair or disable, the victim of police misconduct (i.e. false arrest / excessive force / malicious prosecution / withholding exculpatory evidence) from vindicating both their honor and dignity (by convicting you.)

a) For career advancement of misdemeanor prosecutors within their own agency, and within the law enforcement community(protecting the County / City coffers, and, perhaps, hoping someday to seek the endorsement of the police, in a run for Judge;

b) Because the Deputy District Attorneys who review case filing packets that are sent from police agencies, actually do not understand that the conduct complained of by the police, does not constitute a violation of Cal. Penal Code § 148(a)(1); misdemeanor “resisting / obstructing / delaying a peace officer engaged in the lawful performance of his/her duties.” This is more common that one might imagine.

c) To protect the offending peace officers, and their employing agency, from civil and administrative liability;

d) To protect the offending peace officers, from criminal liability;

e) To protect the offending peace officers, from criminal internal discipline (i.e. an admonition, to suspension, or termination from employment);

f) To protect their pending and past criminal and civil cases, involving the offending officers. Officers who have a proven bad reputation for honesty or brutality, are essentially “finished” as police officers, as the prosecution has a duty to disclose such exculpatory evidence to the defense (i.e. Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963)), and “proven liars” are not all that convincing in Court. Moreover, when police officers are caught committing crimes of dishonesty (perjury, framing innocents, false arrests based upon lies by the officer(s), stealing narcotics, selling narcotics, torturing inmates and other persons in police custody), persons who were convicted, and may still be in prison, maybe able to vacate their convictions and to get out of prison,. even if they’[re guilty, because many appellate courts feel that a conviction based on the testimony of such a police officer cannot stand.

IN THE REAL WORLD THERE ARE NO CONSEQUENCES FOR POLICE PERJURY.

The “perjury show” involved in the prosecution of these type of cases is choreographed by the police agency, the District Attorney’s Office, and their experts and minions. That’s right; perjury. Ask any judge or lawyer about the chances of any witness in a Court proceeding actually getting prosecuted for perjury, for testifying falsely in a California or Federal courtroom. After all, in almost every case, criminal or civil, there are two mutually exclusive versions of at least the key material facts. Someone must be lying, so someone is usually committing perjury in a trial. By the way, perjury is a crime that usually requires two witnesses to convict, so if you’re alone and get gooned by the local Constables, the threat of a perjury prosecution, is generally not available as any protection for those unfortunates who were beaten-up, because the police are guaranteed not to tell the truth.

HOW CAN I POSSIBLY BE PROSECUTED FOR A CRIME THAT I AM INNOCENT OF?

In California, the Deputy District Attorney’s have a slogan: “Anyone can convict the guilty”; It takes real talent, however, to convict the innocent.” It takes even less talent to convict one of violation of Cal. Penal Code § 148(a)(1.) Almost all “Contempt of Cop cases” usually allege bogus violations of the following statutes: 1) Cal. Penal Code § 148(a)(1) (resisting / obstructing / delaying peace officer); 2) Cal. Penal Code § 240 / 241(c)) (assault on a peace officer); 3) Cal. Penal Code § 242 / 243(b) (battery on a peace officer); and 4) Cal. Penal Code § 69 (interfering with public officer via actual or threatened use of force or violence.) Cal. Penal Code § 69 is a “wobbler”; a California public offense that may be filed by the District Attorney’s Office as either a felony or a misdemeanor. In Orange County, Riverside County and Los Angeles County, allegations of violation of Cal. Penal Code § 69 are usually filed as misdemeanors. In San Bernardino County, however, allegations of violation of Cal. Penal Code § 69 are filed as felonies more often than her sister counties. Mr. Steering has advised or consulted on, or have represented clients in, literally thousands, of these “contempt of cop” type cases; both civil and criminal. By far, the most commonly abused criminal in California is the primary “contempt of cop” statute; violation of Cal. Penal Code § 148(a)(1).

DON’T GET FRAMED FOR A CRIME WHEN YOU ARE THE INNOCENT VICTIM.

If you are being or have been prosecuted for a resisting, obstructing, delaying a peace officer or battery on a peace officer, we can help you; defending your bogus criminal case and suing the police for procuring it.

LAW OFFICE OF JERRY L. STEERING

Jerry L. Steering, Esq., 4063 Birch Street, Suite 100, Newport Beach, CA 92660; (949) 474-1849; jerrysteering@yahoo.com

Four photos of Jerry L. Steering with Bob Dole, Diane Sawyer and Melvin BelliJerry L. Steering interviewed on Good Morning America, with co-counsel Bob Dole in Washington, D.C. (Harbert v. U.S.A.) and with former partner Melvin M. Belli (The King of