Television Commercial for Attorney Frank Walker

Showing posts with label sex crimes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sex crimes. Show all posts

Saturday, January 14, 2012

Commonwealth v. M.R.


Defendant charged with Rape, Sexual Assault,Involuntary Deviate Sexual Intercourse and Indecent Assault.

Result following Jury Trial: Not Guilty on All Charges


---------
Pittsburgh Criminal Defense & Injury Attorney Frank Walker
FrankWalkerLaw.com
1-800-496-4143 Office
412.532.6805 Cell

Follow us on Twitter @frankwalkerlaw

Tuesday, July 19, 2011

Child-Luring Suspects Get Lower Bail, With Strict Conditions

RANKIN, Pa. — THE PITTSBURGH CHANNEL.com

Two men who are charged in what Allegheny County police call a case of child-luring got their bail amounts lowered Wednesday, as a district judge placed restrictions on both of them while they wait for a trial date.

"I didn't have any intention of harming anyone, or anything like that, at all," Shane Dockstader said after his preliminary hearing. Co-defendant Timothy Rodgers did not comment.

District Judge Ross Cioppa agreed to reduce bail from $100,000 to $10,000 for each man. He ordered them to report to a bail bond office each week in person, and have no contact with the children, while also refraining from drug and alcohol use, and they are not allowed to be in the areas of Braddock, Braddock Hills, Rankin, Edgewood or Swissvale.

"The main thing that everyone should understand is that the family agreed -- there were no objections from the family -- and the judge put some very strenuous conditions on their bond," defense attorney Frank Walker said.

Click Here to Read More...

...These cases are inherently difficult, especially when considering the public outcry from the outset of the case. But here is the bottom line: Being charged with a Sex crime is no different than being charged with a DUI, Murder, Kidnapping, a Summary Offense or Aggravated Assault - You are innocent until proven guilty.


No matter what the charge, the Commonwealth is still required to prove every single element of every single charge beyond a reasonable doubt.
---------
Pittsburgh Criminal Defense & Injury Attorney Frank Walker
FrankWalkerLaw.com
1-800-496-4143 Office
412.532.6805 Cell

Follow us on Twitter @frankwalkerlaw

Thursday, May 26, 2011

Supreme Court: County can't say where sex offenders can live

By Vivian Nereim, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette


The Pennsylvania Supreme Court today unanimously invalidated an Allegheny County ordinance that had imposed residency restrictions on registered sex offenders, ruling that the ordinance conflicted with state law.


The ordinance, passed in 2007, banned convicted sex offenders registered under Megan's Law from living within 2,500 feet of a child care facility, recreational facility, community center, public park or school.

Six registered sex offenders sued one year later, alleging that the ordinance eliminated nearly all of the addresses in the city of Pittsburgh and much of Allegheny County as possible homes for them. Their lawyer, Donald Driscoll, argued that the restrictions -- forcing offenders to live in outlying communities, away from jobs, transportation, relatives and treatment -- were contrary to the goals of rehabilitation and reintegration.

U.S. District Judge Gary Lancaster struck down the ordinance in 2009, and the county appealed to the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals, which asked the state Supreme Court to hear the case.

Mr. Driscoll and Assistant County Solicitor Craig Maravich argued the case in October. The Supreme Court released its opinion today, ruling 7-0 that the ordinance was invalid.

"We're disappointed in the result," said County Solicitor Michael Wojcik. "We thought that our argument was sufficient to win the day, but apparently the Supreme Court disagreed with us, and we've got to live with that decision."

At this point, Mr. Wojcik said, the future of the Allegheny County ordinance rests with County Council, which might decide to amend it to bring it in line with today's opinion. The ordinance has not been enforced while the litigation was pending.

Mr. Driscoll said that he was pleased with the ruling, and expected it to affect similar ordinances across the state -- such local restrictions have become common, he said.



---------
Pittsburgh Criminal Defense & Injury Attorney Frank Walker
FrankWalkerLaw.com
1-800-496-4143 Office
412.532.6805 Cell

Follow us on Twitter @frankwalkerlaw