louisiana dwi lawyer

  Supreme Court Rules Felons May Sell, Transfer Guns Last year, I wrote of the case of Henderson vs. United States wherein a U.S. Border Patrol agent who, after being convicted of felony distribution of marijuana, was not allowed by a lower court to sell his collection of firearms to a third party. I mentioned that the United States Supreme Court agreed to address the issue. The question before the court was when an individual surrenders his firearms to police and is later convicted of a felony, what happens to the firearms? The weapons can’t go back to the felon because federal law prohibits felons from possessing firearms. Yet the felon still owns the weapons, which could have considerable financial, sentimental, or historical value. Therefore, many felons in this situation would like to sell or transfer ownership their firearms, rather than let the government indefinitely possess them. Does federal law give felons that right to transfer ownership of firearms? In an unanimous decisio

  Threats against President and Vice President 18 U.S. Code § 871 Under federal law, it is a crime to knowingly and willfully threaten the President of the United States.  This includes the following acts: Sending, mailing any letter, paper, writing, print, missive, or document containing any threat to take the life of, to kidnap, or to inflict bodily harm upon the President of the United States. This offense also includes threats against the President-elect, the Vice President, Vice-President-elect or another officer next in the order of succession to the office of President of the United States, Penalty Anyone found in violation of the statute shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both. The U.S. Sentencing Guidelines set a base offense level of 12 for sending a threatening communication, but when a threat to the President is involved, a 6-level “official victim” enhancement applies. More enhancements can be applied if the offender demonstrated an int

  Supreme Court ruling Outlines Limits on Child Pornography Restitution Should those who download child porn pay the victims?   A while back, I wrote a couple blogs about the legal battle concerning restitution between people who have pleaded guilty to possession of child pornography and the victims in the photographs. Somehow I failed to report back on the Supreme Court ruling. Paroline vs. United States The high court’s decision essentially requires that courts find balance with regard to restitution for child pornography victims.

The justices, in a 5-4 vote, reversed a New Orleans federal appeals court ruling that said a Texas man convicted of viewing child porn could be held responsible for the victim’s entire financial burden — even though he possessed pictures of the child and was not involved in their production.   The case, Paroline v. United States, was argued before the Supreme Court early this year and the split decision was released in April. The question for the justices

  Medicare Fraud and Abuse New Orleans Attorney Medicare fraud is typically characterized by: Knowingly submitting false statements or making misrepresentations of fact in order to obtain a federal health care payment for which no entitlement would otherwise exist; Billing for services not rendered or supplies not furnished, including falsifying records. Knowingly billing for services at a level of complexity higher than the service actually provided. Knowingly soliciting, paying, and/or accepting remuneration to induce or reward referrals for items or services reimbursed by Federal health care programs; or Making prohibited referrals for certain designated health services. One does not have to hold a professional license to be convicted of Medicare fraud — anyone can be found guilty. Defendants can range from those involved in solo ventures to broad-based operations by an institution or group.   Penalties A Medicare Fraud conviction exposes individuals to potential criminal and civil